*   "■  :«*? 


srf 

rf^»                               +:JBto8& 

ll 

33P 

t 


^ 


•V 


^         OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY 
*dUFO 


Ji.  WTUytT  S- 1 


WRITINGS 


OP 


LEVI  WOODBURY,  LL.D. 


POLITICAL,  JUDICIAL  AND  LITERARY, 


NOW    FIRST    SELECTED    AND    ARRANGED. 


i 


IN  THREE  VOLUMES. 


VOL.    I.— POLITICAL 


^        OF  THE     ^K* 

UNIVERSITY 


BOSTON: 
LITTLE,   BROWN  AND   COMPANY, 

1852. 


£ 


0*° 


fmsjjse 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1852,  by 
Charles  L.  Woodbury. 
In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  District  of  Massachusetts. 


S  tere  o  typed    by 

HOBART     &    BOBBINS, 

NEW   ENGLAND   TYPE   AND   STEREOTYPE   FOUNDEBY, 

BOSTON. 


RIVERSIDE,    CAMBRIDGE: 
PRINTED  BY  H.  O.  HOUGHTON  AND  COMPANY. 


PREFACE. 


The  object  of  this  publication  is  to  collect  into  a  compact 
form  the-  principal  productions  of  the  author,  for  more  easy 
reference  and  preservation  by  his  friends. 

They  include  some  portions  of  his  labors,  —  Political, 
Judicial,  and  Literary,  —  devoting  one  volume  to  each. 

But  most  of  his  occasional  speeches  on  party  politics  are 
omitted  —  giving  one  or  two  in  the  Appendix,  as  specimens. 
Nearly  half  of  his  speeches  in  the  IT.  S.  Senate,  and  all  the 
great  mass  of  his  official  reports  in  the  Navy  and  Treasury 
departments  during  ten  laborious  years,  except  two  or  three, 
have  been  omitted,  for  the  reason  that  they  would  greatly 
exceed  the  limits  prescribed  in  the  design  of  the  present 
publication. 

Under  the  Judicial  head,  all  his  opinions  on  mere  legal 
questions  have  been  excluded,  as  well  as  several  of  his 
arguments  in  behalf  of  prisoners,  and  some  of  his  charges 
as  a  Judge  to  Grand  Juries ;  republishing  only  the  opin- 
ions on  constitutional  points,  two  arguments  as  counsel, 
and  a  few  charges  of  particular  interest. 

Among  the  Literary  Writings,  many  Essays  and  Letters 
1 

204:033 


VI  PREFACE. 

have,  from  a  necessity  already  stated,  been  omitted  ;  though 
enough,  perhaps,  is  given  to  illustrate  the  full  and  various 
powers  of  the  author's  mind,  and  to  induce  others,  at  some 
future  time,  to  embody  the  whole  for  publication,  embracing 
his  entire  works. 

It  is  indeed  a  subject  of  congratulation  that  the  distin- 
guished author  had  nearly  completed  the  selection  from  his 
papers  for  publication  a  few  months  before  his  last  illness. 
What  remained  to  be  done  has  been  executed  by  his  son, 
Charles  Levi  Woodbury,  Esq. 

Judge  Woodbury  died  at  his  mansion,  Portsmouth,  N. 
H.,  September  4,  1851,  aged  sixty-one  years. 

The  unexpected  event  of  his  death  was  noticed  through- 
out the  country,  by  citizens  of  all  parties,  with  deep  and 
unfeigned  expressions  of  regret,  and  a  respect  manifested 
for  his  character  as  sincere  as  it  was  profound.  It  was 
noticed  by  the  courts,  and  by  meetings  of  the  legal  profes- 
sion, in  all  parts  of  the  Union,  by  appropriate  speeches  and 
resolutions. 

As  the  life  and  character  of  the  deceased  have  been  so 
long  and  so  honorably  identified  with  the  public  admin- 
istration of  affairs  in  this  country,  it  is  quite  probable  that 
they  may  form  the  subjects  of  a  separate  volume,  at  some 

future  time. 

The  Editor. 


BIOGRAPHICAL    NOTICE 


Levi  Woodbury  was  born  at  Francestown,  N.  H.,  22d  Decem- 
ber, 1789.*  He  passed  through  the  ordinary  scenes  of  youth  with 
the  usual  variety  of  adventure,  which  we  need  not  detail,  except 
to  remark  that  he  was  distinguished  for  his  faithfulness  in  the 
observance  of  the  requisitions  of  duty,  and  uniformly  manifested 
those  amiable  qualities  which,  in  his  subsequent  life,  have  formed 
so  prominent  a  feature  of  his  character. 

Blessed,  as  he  was,  with  a  mother  of  extraordinary  judgment 
and  excellence,  he  was  early  guided  in  the  paths  of  virtue,  and 
encouraged  to  seek  his  pleasures  in  active  usefulness.  With  a 
mind  balanced  by  nature  quietly  to  discriminate  between  the 
practical  and  the  speculative,  it  was  easy  to  commence  the  growth 
of  habits  which  favored  the  acquisition  of  knowledge,  and  which 
make  up  the  permanent  basis  of  a  true  character. 

He  was  favored  with  all  the  elevating  influences  of  a  prepar- 
atory education,  and  entered  Dartmouth  College,  Hanover,  N.  H., 
October,  1805.  He  graduated  with  the  highest  honors  of  his 
class,  and  joined  the  Law  School  of  Judges  Reeves  and  Gould, 
at  Litchfield,  Conn.,  September,  1809.  In  1812,  and  while  he 
was  yet  a  student,  he  made  a  speech,  on  the  war  question,  at 

*  His  father  was  a  descendant  of  John  Woodbury,  who  came  from  Somersetshire, 
England,  in  1624,  and  settled  in  Beverly,  Mass.  His  descendants  were,  Humphrey, 
born  in  1609,  and  who  accompanied  his  father  ;  Peter,  son  of  Humphrey,  born  in 
1640  ;  Josiah,  the  son  of  Peter,  born  June  16,  1702  ;  Peter,  the  son  of  Josiah,  born 
March  28, 1738  :  and  Peter,  the  son  of  Peter  and  father  of  Levi,  was  born  in  Beverly, 
Mass.,  in  1767  ;  removed  to  Francestown,  N.  H.,  with  his  father,  where  he  engaged 
in  mercantile  and  agricultural  pursuits.  He  was  about  fifteen  years  representative, 
and  two  years  senator,  in  the  State  Legislature.  (See  History  of  Bedford,  N.  H., 
p.  348.) 


VIII  BIOGRAPHICAL   NOTICE. 

Amherst.  The  politicians  of  Hillsboro'  County  were  so  well 
satisfied  with  it  that  he  was  appointed  to  prepare  an  address  to 
the  people  upon  the  subject,  which  was  adopted  with  great 
unanimity.  It  will  be  found  in  this  volume.  He  left  the  Law 
School  with  distinction,  and  commenced  the  practice  of  law  at 
Francestown,  September,  1812.  His  reputation  soon  commanded 
the  confidence  of  clients,  and  he  almost  immediately  found  him- 
self in  receipt  of  a  large  business  income.  It  was  soon  dis- 
covered, however,  that  he  was  peculiarly  fitted  by  nature,  as  well 
as  by  education,  to  serve  the  people  in  a  public  capacity.  In 
June,  1816,  he  was  appointed  Secretary  of  the  Senate  of  New 
Hampshire ;  and,  in  December  of  the  same  year,  he  was  com- 
missioned as  one  of  the  Judges  of  the  Superior  Court  of  that 
State. 

In  June,  1819,  he  was  married  to  Miss  Elizabeth  W.  Clapp, 
of  Portland,  Me. ;  and  he  is  now  surrounded  by  an  interesting 
family  of  five  children,  viz.,  Charles  Levi,  Mary  E.,  Frances 
Ann,  Virginia  Lafayette,  and  Ellen  Caroline. 

In  1823  he  was  elected  Governor  of  the  State  of  New  Hamp- 
shire, in  which  office  he  acquitted  himself  with  great  dignity, 
energy,  and  usefulness.  He  was  chosen  a  member  and  Speaker 
of  the  House  of  Representatives  in  1825,  and,  in  June  of  the  same 
year,  was  elected  a  Senator  in  Congress.  In  March,  1831,  he 
was  elected  a  member  of  the  State  Senate,  and,  in  May  of  the 
same  year,  he  was  appointed  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  by  President 
Jackson.  In  July,  1834,  he  was  appointed  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury ;  in  1841  he  was  again  elected  a  United  States  Senator 
for  six  years,  and  in  1845  he  was  nominated,  by  President  Polk, 
Associate  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  and 
was  unanimously  confirmed  by  the  Senate.  It  is  proper  to  add 
that  a  foreign  mission  was  tendered  to  him  in  1828,  as  minister  to 
Spain,  and,  in  1845,  the  embassy  to  England;  but  these  he 
declined. 

It  is  not  our  purpose  to  detain  the  reader  with  any  extended 
notice  of  the  life  and  public  services  of  Judge  Woodbury ;  for 
such  a  course  would  hardly  be  deemed  in  good  taste,  while  the 
distinguished  subject  of  our  remark  is  still  in  a  high  position  of 
active  duty ;  and  it  would  seem  to  imply  a  want  of  confidence  in 
his  acts  to  commend  him  without  the  aid  of  extraneous  compli- 
ment.    His  labors  speak  for  him  a  stronger  language  than  can  be 


BIOGRAPHICAL  NOTICE.  IX 

found  in  words.  His  deeds  have  been  those  of  practical  wisdom, 
and,  as  such,  may  be  regarded  as  profitable  lessons  for  the  study 
of  the  people  throughout  the  nation. 

Duty  and  fidelity  in  a  public  servant  make  up  an  important 
portion  of  a  nation's  moral  wealth.  Mind  and  skill,  in  the  dispo- 
sition and  regulation  of  the  great  interests  of  humanity,  may  be 
regarded  as  the  chief  source  of  a  nation's  prosperity.  Whoever 
masters  his  subject,  and  succeeds  in  teaching  its  relations  and 
tendencies  to  the  people  for  practical  purposes ;  whoever  aids  in 
developing  the  resources  of  a  country,  and  in  tracing  out  the 
dangers  and  the  benefits  of  a  wise  or  of  a  doubtful  legislation, 
for  the  good  of  the  people;  whoever  points  out  the  great  objects 
of  life,  the  means  of  their  attainment,  the  legitimate  sphere  of  a 
righteous  ambition,  the  elevating  tendency  of  truth,  justice  and 
integrity ;  and,  withal,  whoever  becomes  a  teacher  in  these  rela- 
tions, and  enforces  his  instructions  by  the  examples  of  a  living 
practice,  is  a  public  benefactor.  He  stands  before  the  world  as 
the  representative  of  those  attributes  of  divinity  which  redeem 
men  from  their  sins  and  from  their  ignorance,  and  nations  from 
the  misrule  of  corruption.  It  is  a  mission  of  mind,  and  heart, 
and  action ;  and  to  be  equal  to  its  high  requisitions  presupposes 
pure  and  disinterested  motives,  which  belong  only  to  the  man 
who  seeks  to  be  useful,  and  has  confidence  in  the  simple  rewards 
which  inhere  in  the  practice  of  virtue  and  patriotism. 

If  we  view  Judge  Woodbury  as  a  man  and  as  a  citizen,  we 
find  in  him  an  example  of  quiet  and  efficient  duty  which  it  is 
profitable  to  contemplate.  With  a  power  to  perceive  the  wants  of 
men,  and  with  a  mind  both  able  and  prompt  to  administer  to  their 
proper  gratification;  with  an  unyielding  perseverance,  which 
is  checked  by  no  obstacle,  and  swayed  by  no  unholy  purpose  ; 
with  a  dignity  which  is  the  natural  language  of  truth,  and  a 
simplicity  which  is  alike  approachable  by  the  great  and  the  hum- 
ble ;  with  an  integrity  that  is  above  selfishness,  and  with  a  phi- 
lanthropy that  is  above  speculation,  —  he  has  ever  performed  the 
duties  incumbent  upon  the  man  as  a  being  of  benevolence,  and 
upon  the  citizen  as  a  liberal  member  of  society.  As  a  friend, 
faithful ;  as  a  man,  devoted  to  the  great  concerns  of  humanity ; 
and  as  a  citizen,  alive  to  all  that  advances  and  protects  his  coun- 
try, or  subserves  the  world.  To  use  the  application  of  a  remark 
made  by  an  estimable  friend,  but  few  men  are  endowed  to  an 
1* 


X  BIOGRAPHICAL   NOTICE. 

equal  degree  with  that  peculiar  quality  which  Burke  aptly 
denominated  " civil  discretion" — which,  while  all  are  ready  to 
admire,  but  few  can  command  the  ability  to  practice. 

His  literary  character  may  be  best  seen  in  the  writings  which 
make  the  third  volume  of  this  selection.  It  is  marked  with  that 
peculiar  thoroughness  which  distinguishes  all  his  productions, 
and  which  has  its  origin  in  science.  He  is  conversant  with  the 
poets,  and  seizes  with  a  tasteful  judgment  the  happiest  gems  of 
thought,  though  he  seldom  indulges  in  the  exercise  of  his  powers 
of  imagination,  except  occasionally  to  subserve  the  more  solid 
themes  of  science  and  history,  by  the  simple  embellishments 
which  harmonize  with  a  cheerful  temper  and  the  diversified 
beauties  of  truth. 

To  speak  of  him  as  a  jurist  would  seem  to  be  almost  an  act  of 
supererogation.  His  station  sufficiently  indicates  how  he  is 
appreciated  by  his  distinguished  fellow-countrymen.  His  labors 
discover  with  what  completeness  he  disposes  of  the  varying  obli- 
gations of  citizens  engaged  in  litigation,  and  his  charges  illustrate 
with  what  versatility  of  talent  he  elucidates  the  fundamental  prin- 
ciples of  law,  and  with  what  certainty  and  consistency  he  sustains 
the  great  bulwark  of  our  liberties,  the  Federal  Constitution.  As 
a  judge,  his  views  are  singularly  comprehensive.  The  arts  and 
sciences  are  made  his  servants,  and  the  sources  of  knowledge 
appear  to  be  within  the  sphere  of  his  control,  for  the  beneficent 
purposes  of  truth  and  justice. 

As  a  statesman,  Judge  Woodbury  stands  in  the  first  rank  of 
those  far-sighted  men  who  scan  at  a  glance  the  necessities  of  a 
people  —  the  wants  of  a  nation.  His  powers  of  analysis  are  equal 
to  all  subjects,  and  his  simple  tracing  of  the  philosophy  of  cause 
and  effect,  in  the  world  of  legislation,  shows  the  hand  of  a  master 
and  the  skill  of  a  prophetic  mind. 

His  Message  to  the  Legislature,  as  Governor  of  New  Hamp- 
shire, —  which  may  be  found  at  length  in  this  volume,  —  is  char- 
acterized by  a  vigor  and  comprehensiveness  of  thought,  by  an  ele- 
vation of  purpose  and  spirit  of  remark,  not  to  be  surpassed  by  any 
similar  document  within  the  range  of  our  knowledge.  It  com- 
bines the  philosophy  of  things  with  a  method  of  practical  applica- 
tion of  principles.  It  elevates  while  it  teaches  the  citizen,  and 
encourages  measures  eminently  calculated  to  promote  industry 
and  enterprise,  and  add  to  the  comforts  of  life.    It  is  fraught  with 


BIOGRAPHICAL  NOTICE.  XI 

suggestions  in  respect  to  the  best  means  of  advancing  science  and 
multiplying  the  blessings  of  education,  which,  though  not  imme- 
diately adopted  by  his  native  State,  have  since  been  realized  in 
other  commonwealths,  and  gained  for  them  a  most  enviable  repu- 
tation. 

If  we  follow  him  to  the  counsels  of  the  nation,  —  we  there  find 
the  same  indomitable  spirit  in  its  varied  workings  for  the  good  of 
his  beloved  country,  and  for  the  advancement  of  the  great  prin- 
ciples of  freedom  throughout  the  world.  Vigilant,  deliberate, 
prompt,  and  equal  to  every  emergency,  he  lost  no  opportunity  for 
doing  good  where  duty  called,  and  he  spared  no  labor  in  gather- 
ing information  where  ignorance  was  to  be  enlightened,  or  where 
opinions  were  uncertain.  Though  as  true  to  the  Democracy  as 
the  needle  to  the  poles,  he  sanctioned  no  party  movement  incon- 
sistent with  magnanimity,  and  yielded  to  no  factious  influence 
derogatory  to  character.  He  sought  no  schemes  for  gratifying  a 
vain  ambition,  and  studied  no  compliment  to  gain  the  favor  of 
political  opponents.  He  was  firm  without  obstinacy,  prompt  with- 
out haste,  and  confident  without  arrogance.  He  could  be  severe 
with  courtesy,  and  uncompromising  without  offence.  Before  he 
was  called  to  administer  a  government  over  others,  he  had 
learned  the  prerequisite  secret  of  governing  himself.  Before  he 
acted  upon  the  condition  of  things,  he  acquired  a  knowledge  of 
their  principles. 

He  became  eminent  as  a  practical  statesman,  and  discovered 
by  his  extensive  inquiries  and  researches  the  value  of  knowledge 
to  a  nation,  and  the  power  of  knowledge  to  a  people. 

But  to  enlarge  in  this  place  is  to  detain  readers  from  the  repast 
to  which  they  have  been  invited ;  and  we  can  have  no  stronger 
confirmation  of  our  views  in  respect  to  the  distinguished  subject 
of  our  notice,  than  may  be  found  embraced  in  these  volumes 
herewith  submitted  to  a  discriminating  public. 


CONTENTS 


Page 

PREFACE,        . v 

BIOGRAPHICAL  NOTICE, vn 

SPEECHES. 

THE  IMPORTANCE  OF  A  CONGRESSIONAL   COMMITTEE  ON  AGRI- 
CULTURE,       13 

IMPORTANCE  OF  A  LOW   DUTY   ON  SALT, 15 

RELIEF  OF   THE  SURVIVING   OFFICERS  OF  THE  REVOLUTION,       .  29 

JUDICIARY  OF  THE  UNITED   STATES, 41 

MISSION  TO  PANAMA, 67 

SURVEY  AND   SALE   OF  PUBLIC  LANDS, 85 

STATE   OF   THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY, 12G 

STATE  OF  THE   NATIONAL  TREASURY  (Second  Speech),    .       .       .  163 

TEA  AND  COFFEE,  — NECESSARIES   OF   LIFE, 182 

ON  THE  LAND  DISTRIBUTION  BILL, 187 

NATIONAL  FINANCES, 212 

IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER, 236 

TARIFF   (1842), 266 

TARIFF  (1844), 302 

NAVAL  SCHOOL, 353 

RE-ANNEXATION  OF  TEXAS, 355 

REPORTS. 

ON  THE  SAFE-KEEPING  OF  THE  PUBLIC  MONEY,       .       .       .       .425 

*  LOSSES  FROM  BANKS  AND  BANK-PAPER, 432 

SUBSTITUTE  FOR  SPIRIT  RATIONS,  AND  FOR  WHIPPING    IN  THE 

NAVY, 454 

BREAKWATER  AT  THE  MOUTH  OF  DELAWARE  BAY,      ...  455 


XIV  CONTENTS. 

GUBERNATORIAL  MESSAGE,  SPEECHES,   AND 
REPORTS   ON   STATE  TOPICS. 

Page 

GUBERNATORIAL  MESSAGE  (1828), 463 

LAWS   CONCERNING  PAUPERS, 477 

MARTIAL  LAW, 485 

PROTESTANT  TEST  FOR  HOLDING  OFFICES, 486 

PROPERTY  TEST,      .       .       .       .       .       .       .       . 490 


OCCASIONAL  LETTERS  AND   SPEECHES   ON 
IMPORTANT   SUBJECTS. 

RIGHTS  OF   CATHOLICS, 495 

PUBLIC  SERVICES  APPRECIATED, •     ...  506 

GENERAL  PRINCIPLES   OF  FREE  TRADE, 510 

THE  UNION  AND  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  LAW, 534 

AN    ADDRESS,  AT    BOSTON,  TO   LAFAYETTE,   ON    THE    OCCASION 

OF  HIS  VISITING  PORTSMOUTH,  N.  H., 535 

BIRTH-DAY  OF  JEFFERSON, 536 

RETURN  FROM  WASHINGTON  (1841), 540 

PRESIDENT  POLK'S  VISIT  TO  PORTSMOUTH, 544 

APPENDIX. 

WAR  WITH  GREAT  BRITAIN  (1812), 549 

SPEECH  IN  FANEUIL  HALL,  ON  PARTY  SUBJECTS  (1841),     .       .  560 

ORATION,  JULY  4,  1850,  AT  PORTSMOUTH,  N.  H., 575 

SPEECH  AT  ELIOT,  ME.,  BEFORE  THE  PRESIDENTIAL    ELECTION 

(1844), 593 

TABLES, 617 


SPEECHES. 


SPEECHES 


THE  IMPORTANCE  OF  A  CONGRESSIONAL  COMMITTEE 
ON  AGRICULTURE.* 

The  resolution,  that  the  SOth  Rule  of  the  Senate  be  amended,  by  adding  thereto  "  a 
committee  on  agriculture^  being  under  consideration,  — 

Mr.  Woodbury  observed,  that  he  should  vote  for  the  resolution 
now  before  the  Senate,  notwithstanding  the  strong  opposition  to  it 
which  had  been  manifested.  Yet  he  would  not  have  risen  to  offer  any 
remarks  upon  its  passage,  but  for  the  circumstance  that,  on  Wednes- 
day, he  had  voted  against  the  amendment  proposed  to  the  Committee 
on  Manufactures,  and,  consequently,  without  explanation,  an  infer- 
ence might  be  drawn,  by  some,  of  inconsistency  between  the  two 
votes.  That  amendment,  however,  was  resisted  by  him  upon  the  sole 
and  identical  principle  which,  in  his  opinion,  operated  with  the  greatest 
force  in  favor  of  the  present  resolution, — the  principle  of  inexpediency 
in  referring  the  subjects  of  manufactures  and  agriculture  to  the  same 
committee,  an  inexpediency  as  great  as  to  continue  to  refer  com- 
merce and  manufactures  to  the  same  committee.  All  the  arguments 
so  eloquently  urged  on  that  day,  by  the  gentlemen  from  Massachu- 
setts and  New  Jersey,  for  a  separate  committee  on  each  of  the  two 
last  subjects,  applied  in  equal  vigor  for  a  separate  committee  on 
agriculture.  Not  that  he  believed  the  interests  of  all  these  cardinal 
branches  of  industry  were  not  inseparably  connected,  for  he  cordially 
united  with  the  gentleman  from  South  Carolina  in  that  particular ; 
but  it  was  a  connection  in  their  importance  to  society,  and  in  favor 
due  from  the  government:  nor  that  he  believed  they  were  not 
sisters,  as  happily  expressed  by  the  gentleman  from  Maryland,  — 

*  A  speech  delivered  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  Dec.  9,  1825. 

2 


14  A   COMMITTEE   ON  AGRICULTURE. 

but  sisters,  chiefly,  in  the  affections  of  this  House.  They  could  be 
received  separately,  and,  like  those  sciences  having  one  common  bond, 
must  be  examined  in  detail ;  —  peculiar  talents  could,  in  distinct  com- 
mittees, be  brought  to  bear  on  the  investigation  of  each ;  and,  by  a 
proper  analysis  and  scrutiny  of  subjects  of  legislation,  the  same 
utility  is  attained  as  by  a  proper  division  of  labor  in  the  common 
affairs  of  life.  That  there  was  no  employment  for  such  a  committee, 
had  been  again  pressed  by  the  ingenious  gentleman  from  Maine ;  but, 
in  addition  to  the  answer  given  by  the  mover  of  the  resolution,  he 
would  suggest,  that  all  questions  of  direct  taxes  on  land,  all  internal 
duties  and  excises,  and  all  imposts,  no  less  than  questions  of  foreign 
and  internal  commerce,  have  a  powerful,  and  often  an  immediate 
influence,  on  the  interests  of  agriculture.  And,  in  a  territory  like 
ours,  of  between  two  and  three  millions  of  square  miles,  with  two- 
thirds  of  its  population  exclusively  engaged  in  agriculture,  with 
annual  exports  from  agriculture  of  about  forty  millions,  and  with, 
probably,  fifteen  millions  of  our  duties  paid,  in  the  end,  by  the 
tillers  of  the  soil,  who  consume,  and  not  by  the  merchants,  who 
import,  it  is  impossible  not  to  find  subjects  peculiarly  proper,  in 
some  stage  of  their  progress  through  this  House,  to  be  referred  to 
such  a  committee.  True  it  is,  that  the  subject,  as  heretofore,  might 
be  referred  to  other  committees ;  and  it  is  equally  true,  that  all  sub- 
jects whatever  might  be  referred  to  a  committee  of  the  whole  House. 
True  it  is,  also,  that  the  duties  of  such  a  committee  are  not  specifi- 
cally defined ;  nor  are  the  duties  of  any  other  committee,  but  depend 
on  the  express  object  of  the  committee,  and  the  nature  of  subjects 
coming  before  Congress.  If  those  concerning  agriculture  are  now 
small,  he  hoped  the  prosperity  of  it  would  long  keep  them  small. 
But  that  her  interests  were  daily  touched,  directly  or  indirectly,  and 
might  be  considered  by  reports  of  other  committees  being  referred  to 
the  committee  before  any  final  measures  are  taken,  will  be  manifest 
by  adverting,  not  only  to  the  effect  of  the  tariff,  as  before  named,  on 
some  kinds  of  produce,  but  to  the  duties  on  sugar,  as  affecting  the 
agriculture  of  that  section  suited  to  the  cane ;  on  hemp,  as  affecting 
another  section;  on  woollen  and  cotton  goods,  as  affecting  the 
produce  of  other  sections;  tobacco,  another.  As  a  strong  illus- 
tration how  agriculture  may  be  affected  by  duties  on  articles  con- 
sumed merely,  and  not  grown  here,  something  more  than  half  a 
million  in  value  of  salt  is  annually  imported,  paying  a  duty  of  twenty 
cents  per  bushel ;  and  a  large  proportion  of  it  being  consumed  by  the 
farmers  of  the  North,  this  duty  is  a  tax  on  them.  The  hardy 
yeomanry  of  the  country  may  ask,  in  time,  to  be  heard  on  these  and 
similar  topics  :  and,  though  groaning  under  no  such  tithes  and  poor- 
rates  as  to  require  for  relief  the  cumbrous  system  of  British  Corn 
Laws;  though  not  wont  to  be  so  clamorous  as  those  engaged  in 
some  other  pursuits ;  though  not  thundering  at  your  doors  so  often 
with  petitions,  memorials,  and  remonstrances;   yet  they  have  the 


IMPORTANCE   OF   A  LOW   DUTY   ON   SALT.  15 

same  constitutional  right  to  notice,  are  as  deeply  interested  in  all  the 
legitimate  objects  of  national  legislation ;  and,  as  lords  of  the  soil, 
were  known,  by  every  hearer,  to  yield  in  no  human  excellence  to  the 
lords  of  the  spindle.  The  other  House  had  a  similar  committee,  and 
he  trusted  this  would  be  deemed  an  additional  argument  for  one 
here.* 


IMPORTANCE  OF  A  LOW  DUTY  ON  SALT.f 

The  bill  to  repeal,  in  part,  the  duties  on  Imported  Salt,  having  been  read  a  second 
time,  tvas  under  discussion. 

Mr.  Woodbury  said,  the  object  and  tendency  of  this  bill  had 
by  some  abroad  been  misunderstood,  and  by  others  misrepre- 
sented. Standing,  as  may  be  thought,  in  some  degree,  in  a  pater- 
nal relation  to  the  measure,  it  might  be  expected  that  he  should 
attempt  to  correct  these  errors,  and  vindicate  it  from  the  numerous 
objections  with  which  it  had  been  assailed.  The  bill,  as  you  well 
know,  Mr.  President,  was  not  intended  to  injure  the  fisheries :  noth- 
ing of  that  kind  being  either  implied  or  expressed  in  its  provisions. 
But  its  legitimate  operation  will  be  to  aid  the  fishermen,  in  common 
with  all  other  consumers  of  imported  salt.  Neither  is  it  gotten  up  in 
hostility  to  manufacturers,  nor  will  it  prove  injurious  to  any  due 
encouragement  of  them.  Just  as  little,  also,  is  it  calculated  to  endan- 
ger the  financial  operations  of  the  government,  as  permanently  estab- 
lished for  peace,  or  as  they  happen  to  exist  at  the  present  moment. 
The  principle  of  the  bill  is  altogether  different,  and  lies  within  a  sin- 
gle inquiry.  It  is  this  :  Ought  not  a  war-tax,  —  a  tax  imposed 
merely  to  meet  the  great  exigencies  of  such  a  crisis,  —  a  tax  tempo- 
rary at  its  commencement,  exorbitant  in  amount,  and  partial  in  its 
operation,  —  ought  not  such  a  tax  to  be  now  lessened  ?  That  is  the 
question.  Now,  after  twelve  years  of  plenty  and  peace,  and  after  the 
fullest  examination  by  committees  has  shown  that  the  passage  of  the 
bill  will  aid,  rather  than  injure,  the  fisheries,  —  will  not  sensibly  affect 
the  present  operations  of  the  treasury,  or  any  permanent  branches  of 
the  revenue,  nor  leave  our  manufacturers  of  domestic  salt  without  a 
protection  as  great  as  is  extended  to  any  article  of  a  similar  charac- 
ter in  the  whole  tariff, — these  various  circumstances  bearing  on  the 
bill  shall  be  adverted  to,  briefly  as  possible.  But,  the  paramount, 
the  primary  object,  is  to  ascertain  if  the  present  duty  be  indeed  a 

*  The  committee  was  raised. 

t  A  speech  delivered  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  Feb.  1,  1827. 


16  IMPORTANCE    OF   A   LOW   DUTY   ON   SALT. 

war-tax.  When  I  call  the  present  duty  on  salt  a  war-tax,  it  is  not 
by  way  of  rhetorical  figure,  or  for  effect  upon  any  honest  prejudice ; 
but  it  is  to  invite  the  attention  of  the  Senate  to  the  true  origin  of 
the  duty,  as  tending  strongly  to  illustrate  the  opinion,  that,  not  having 
been  designed  for  the  state  of  things  in  peace,  it  is  too  large  and 
unequal  for  any  legitimate  purposes,  in  the  present  condition  of  the 
country. 

Gentlemen  well  remember,  that,  at  the  beginning  of  our  late  war, 
salt  was  entirely  free  from  even  the  smallest  duty.  It  was  not  till 
July,  1813,  in  a  state  of  obstinate  hostilities,  under  a  diminished  rev- 
enue, with  extraordinary  expenditures  and  accompanied  by  great 
financial  embarrassment,  that  the  present  tax  was  imposed.  It  is 
well  known,  that,  in  such  a  condition  of  public  affairs,  all  ordinary 
rules  of  taxation  must  bend.  They  must  yield  far  enough  to  meet 
the  controlling  necessities  of  the  country.  The  necessaries  of  life 
must  then  submit  to  be  burthened,  as  well  as  its  luxuries  :  and  the 
poor,  in  common  with  the  rich,  must  then  defend  their  hearths  and 
altars  by  large  contributions  and  large  sacrifices.  It  is  on  such  occa- 
sions only  that  salt,  though  an  article  of  the  first  importance  to  all 
classes,  may  properly  be  subjected  to  a  great  tax;  because  it  is 
thus  subjected  in  common  with  the  soil  we  till  for  our  daily  bread, 
and  with  the  houses  that  give  us  daily  shelter  from  the  weather.  It 
is  true,  I  grant,  that  the  great  bulk  and  weight  of  salt  compared 
with  its  value,  and  that  its  universal  use,  often  induce  governments, 
in  the  exigencies  of  war,  to  select  it  for  the  most  severe  taxation,  in 
preference  to  other  necessaries  ;  because,  for  these  reasons,  it  is  more 
clifiicult  to  be  smuggled,  and  more  certain  to  yield  a  revenue.  But 
these  circumstances,  it  is  manifest,  furnish  no  reason  for  the  tax 
itself;  and  in  an  especial  manner,  when  the  tax  operates  exclusively 
on  a  single  section  of  a  country.  The  true  reason  for  the  tax  itself  is 
the  controlling  emergency  of  the  occasion,  —  the  stern  necessities  of 
war :  and  I  trust  that  no  fair-minded  politician  can  ever  repeat  again 
and  again  the  incidental  circumstances  before  named,  as  the  true  rea- 
son for  either  imposing  or  retaining  a  tax  so  exorbitant,  unequal  and 
oppressive.  Another  decisive  proof  that  it  was  deemed,  when  imposed, 
a  mere  war-tax,  is  the  express  limitation  of  its  continuance,  in  the  act 
of  Congress,  to  only  one  year  after  the  war.  Had  it  been  intended  as 
a  part  of  the  permanent  system  of  our  revenue,  or  merely  as  a  pro- 
tection to  manufacturers,  why  this  limitation  ? 

Again :  The  history  of  our  country,  which  on  this  point  cannot 
deceive  us,  shows,  that  when  the  duty  had  once  before  been  increased, 
in  1797,  as  high  as  twenty  cents,  it  was  imposed  as  a  quasi  war-tax,  on 
account  of  our  difficulties  with  France.  Then,  too,  was  a  limitation 
of  it  to  three  years ;  and  never  afterwards,  till  totally  repealed,  was 
it  continued  without  an  express  protestation,  in  the  act  itself,  that  it 
was  not  to  become,  for  any  purpose,  either  of  revenue  or  protection,  a 
permanent  part  of  our  tariff  system. 


IMPORTANCE   OF  A  LOW  DUTY   ON  SALT.  17 

Our  statesmen,  at  both  periods,  had  numerous  examples  before 
them,  and  we  now  have  still  more,  that  a  large  tax  on  this  article  was 
injudicious,  and  inappropriate  to  any  but  a  state  of  war;  and  that 
then,  as  before  remarked,  it  had  chiefly  for  its  apology  the  great 
tyrant,  necessity,  —  the  great  principle  of  self-preservation,  and  the 
right  of  government  to  all  constitutional  means  most  likely  to  preserve 
the  endangered  safety  of  the  republic. 

When  the  feelings  of  mankind,  on  any  one  subject,  in  different 
nations  and  ages,  thus  coincide,  it  is  a  pretty  sure  indication  of  their 
correctness.  If  a  large  salt  tax  in  peace,  then,  has  justly  been  the 
abhorrence  of  mankind  in  all  time,  something  has  always  been  thought, 
and  should  now  be  thought,  due  from  government  to  such  a  universal 
sentiment.  I  shall  not  detain  the  Senate  by  references  upon  this 
point,  when  numerous  instances  are  doubtless  fresh  in  their  recollec- 
tion ;  and  when  none  of  us  can  have  forgotten  the  eloquence  upon  this 
subject  which  was  displayed  in  the  Senate  at  our  last  session,  from  the 
gentlemen  both  on  my  right  and  my  left.  Permit  me,  a  moment,  to 
appeal  merely  to  what  has  occurred  within  our  own  brief  lives.  Have 
we  not  seen  the  salt  tax,  or  gabelle,  in  France,  first  imposed  as  a  war- 
tax,  become  one  of  those  wide-spread  and  odious  oppressions  most 
instrumental  in  rousing  the  great  mass  of  the  population  in  their  late 
revolution,  —  a  tax  far  more  burthensome  and  execrated  than  even 
the  tax  upon  tea  in  our  own  Revolution  1  Let  it  not  be  forgotten  that 
there,  as  here,  it  had  commenced  as  a  war-tax ;  and  had  been  remitted 
and  renounced  at  different  periods,  till,  under  new  pretexts,  it  slid  into 
a  permanent  peace  impost,  equalling  nearly  one-fourth  of  the  whole 
revenue  of  the  empire.  So  stealth-like  and  absorbing  is  generally  the 
character  of  power,  when  abused ;  and  if  no  peaceful  correction  is  in 
time  made  by  rulers,  the  people  themselves,  on  some  great  crisis,  are 
generally  inclined  to  inflict  fearful  retribution. 

The  tax  on  salt  began  in  the  same  way  in  England,  and  fluctuated 
in  amount,  and  was  suspended  on  various  occasions.  But  the  vast 
expenses  of  her  continental  wars  had,  prior  to  the  year  1816,  com- 
pelled her,  as  a  measure  of  unavoidable  necessity,  under  such  press- 
ures, to  increase  her  excise  on  salt  to  fifteen  shillings  sterling  per 
bushel  when  used  for  domestic  purposes,  and  from  two  to  six  shillings 
as  used  in  various  other  specified  ways.  There,  too,  having  begun  in 
war,  and  at  first  being  limited  in  duration,  both  rulers  and  ruled  felt 
it  had  swollen  with  emergencies  to  a  most  oppressive  burthen.  They 
understood  the  principle  on  which  it  stood,  and  that  it  was  fast  begin- 
ning to  be  incorporated  into  her  permanent  system  of  revenue ;  and 
though  they  at  first  resisted  a  repeal,  on  arguments  similar  to  those 
advanced  yesterday  and  to-day,  yet  the  natural  hatred  to  such  a  tax  in 
peace,  the  strong  sense  of  justice  among  her  statesmen,  and  the  pater- 
nal regard  of  the  government  towards  its  agricultural  subjects,  at 
length  overcame  every  obstacle.  All  opposition  to  its  repeal  was  in 
2* 


18  IMPORTANCE    OF  A  LOW   DUTY   ON   SALT. 

the  end  prostrated,  and  in  May,  1822,  provision  was  made  for  the 
gradual  removal  of  the  whole  excise. 

A  brief  history  of  the  transaction  will  furnish  an  instructive  lesson 
to  us,  who  take  pride  in  our  alacrity  to  relieve  the  great  mass  of  the 
people  from  their  burthens,  rather  than  in  our  ingenuity  to  find  rea- 
sons for  continuing  them.  The  excise  was  the  only  tax  felt  on  this 
subject. 

The  first  proposition  was  to  remove  the  excise  one-third  annually : 
the  next,  to  leave  a  part  of  it  permanent ;  but,  in  the  end,  thirteen- 
fifteenths  was  at  once  taken  off,  and  the  last  two-fifteenths  ceased  in 
January,  1825.  This  was  by  the  3d  of  George  IV. ;  and,  what  I  may 
now  as  well  state,  once  for  all,  the  same  statute  removed  not  only  the 
whole  excise,  but  the  whole  duty  on  imported  salt,  except  three  pence 
per  bushel.  So  that  now,  for  every  purpose,  in  England,  whether  of 
excise  or  tariff,  or  protection  of  any  kind,  the  duty  is  short  of  ten  cents 
on  the  bushel.  The  grounds  of  opposition  to  the  repeal,  as  before 
remarked,  were  much  the  same  there  as  here.  It  was  urged  to  be  an 
article  difficult  to  smuggle,  certain  to  yield  a  revenue,  and  too  produc- 
tive in  amount  for  the  government  to  spare  from  taxation.  But  though 
it  furnished  to  the  treasury  more  than  a  million  and  a  half  pounds 
sterling  annually,  —  and  though  the  yearly  expenditures  of  England, 
at  the  time  of  the  repeal,  exceeded  seventy-two  million  pounds  ster- 
ling, and  she  needed  more  than  half  of  her  whole  revenue  to  keep 
down  only  the  interest  on  her  national  debt,  — yet  Parliament,  from 
regard  to  the  landed  interest,  and  in  the  exercise  of  sound  practical 
wisdom  towards  all  classes,  and  in  accordance  with  the  enlightened  mag- 
nanimity of  the  age,  relinquished  the  whole,  and  reduced  the  duty  on 
importations  even  lower  than  what  is  now  proposed  in  this  country. 
Here  the  objections  to  the  present  bill  are  much  weaker  than  to  that 
measure,  and  the  arguments  in  its  favor  are  much  stronger.  The 
amount  of  revenue  to  be  released  by  this  bill  is  not  more  than  one 
twenty-fourth  as  large,  and  the  necessities  for  the  revenue  here  are, 
comparatively,  nothing.  On  the  other  hand,  the  reasons  for  the  repeal 
here  are  peculiarly  urgent.  Not  only  is  the  present  exorbitant  duty 
a  mere  war-tax,  as  we  have  attempted  to  show,  but  it  is  unequal  in  its 
operation,  falling  with  most  oppressive  weight  on  the  poor  and  mid- 
dling classes.  It  resembles,  to  use  the  language  of  Mr.  Gallatin  in 
1797,  an  odious  poll  tax,  nearly  equal  upon  every  member  of  commu- 
nity, male  or  female,  indigent  or  rich,  because  each  consumer  of  food 
consumes  about  the  same  quantity  of  salt,  and  thus  pays,  as  a  consumer, 
nearly  a  like  sum.  The  tax  is  especially  burthensome  and  invidious 
to  the  agricultural  interest.  They  are  not  only  the  most  numerous 
portion  of  consumers,  but  in  many  cases  of  the  use  of  salt  they  pay  the 
whole  tax  in  its  price,  without  being  able  to  obtain  any  remuneration 
in  subsequent  sales  of  the  articles  in  which  salt  is  used.  To  the 
farmer,  like  the  elements  of  air  and  water,  salt  enters  into  the  expense 
of  almost  every  article  he  either  consumes  or  sells ;  and,  although  in  this 


IMPORTANCE   OF  A  LOW   DUTY   ON  SALT.  19 

manner  the  tax  is  hourly  felt,  yet  it  is  in  such  small  quantities  in  each 
article  as  generally  to  elude  calculation  in  the  prices  he  obtains. 

Nor  can  the  tax,  as  one  upon  a  luxury,  or  upon  a  mere  convenience, 
be  avoided  by  the  highest  degree  of  vigilance  and  economy ;  for  the 
daily  bread  of  every  man,  woman  and  child,  is  usually  seasoned  by 
this  universal  condiment,  as  well  for  health  as  pleasure ;  and,  in  the 
preservation  of  butter,  cheese  and  meat,  as  well  as  in  the  feeding  of 
every  species  of  stock,  its  liberal  use  comports  with  the  strictest  fru- 
gality, and  in  our  present  state  of  society  is  almost  indispensable. 

To  measure  at  once  the  partiality  of  the  tax  against  agriculture,  it 
has  been  seen  that  those  engaged  in  this  pursuit,  though  of  moderate 
fortune,  and  often  indigent,  pay,  as  mere  consumers,  as  much  per 
head  of  the  tax  as  those  who  compose  the  wealthier  classes.  As  the 
number  engaged  in  agriculture  in  this  country  amounts  to  full  four- 
fifths  of  our  whole  population,  they  pay  over  $450,000  of  the  whole 
annual  tax  of  about  $600,000. 

But  they  pay  also,  as  purchasers  of  the  salt  that  is  incorporated  into 
what  they  sell,  but  in  so  small  quantities  as  not  sensibly  to  affect  the 
price,  a  large  portion  of  the  other  $150,000  of  the  whole  tax;  and,  in 
this  way,  doubly  does  the  tax  operate  in  a  partial,  oppressive,  and, 
indeed,  almost  exclusive  manner,  on  that  portion  of  our  population. 
What  is  still  worse,  it  operates  almost  exclusively  on  a  part  of  that 
population,  in  a  single  section  of  the  Union,  bordering  on  the  Atlantic 
frontier.  The  British  excise,  before  it  was  repealed,  was  much  more 
friendly  to  agriculture  than  our  present  impost;  because,  while  it 
imposed  fifteen  shillings  per  bushel  on  salt  used  for  mere  household  pur- 
poses, the  tax  was  only  one-sixth  of  that  sum,  or  two  shillings  and  six- 
pence, on  salt  given  to  cattle,  and  only  two  shillings  on  salt  used  for 
preserving  provisions.  But  here  no  discrimination  comes  in  aid  of  the 
farmer,  the  utmost  farthing  of  the  highest  duty  being  in  every  case 
exacted. 

These  and  similar  considerations  have  once,  in  this  country,  under 
the  paternal  administration  of  Mr.  Jefferson,  produced  a  total  repeal 
of  the  duty  on  salt ;  and  it  was  effected  under  circumstances  no  less 
creditable  to  the  government,  and  gratifying  to  the  agriculturalist,  than 
was  the  late  total  repeal  of  the  excise  upon  salt  in  England.  In 
December,  1807,  some  time  before  the  expiration  of  the  duty  as  lim- 
ited by  the  act,  Congress  cheerfully  and  magnanimously  removed  the 
whole  of  the  burthen.  The  journals  disclose  the  remarkable  fact  of 
only  five  nays  in  one  House,  and  ten  in  the  other,  upon  the  final 
passage  of  the  repealing  bill. 

Are  we  now  to  be  considered  less  friendly  to  the  great  foundation- 
stone  of  all  our  prosperity,  the  agricultural  interest?  Shall  we 
refuse  to  do  even  half  as  much  for  their  relief,  by  a  repeal  of  only  half 
the  present  duty  1  Are  we  unable  to  do  half  as  much  for  them  as 
could  be  done  twenty  years  ago  ?  Are  we  not  half  as  prosperous  as  at 
that  time  ?  and,  notwithstanding  little  local  interests,  shall  we  not  show 


20  IMPORTANCE   OF  A  LOW  DUTY  ON  SALT. 

this  magnanimity,  after  the  recommendation  of  such  a  measure  by  three 
separate  committees  of  our  own  House, — that  on  agriculture,  the  last 
session,  and  those  on  finance,  of  both  the  last  and  present  sessions  1 

It  now  becomes  me  to  notice  more  particularly  some  of  the  specific 
objections  that  have  been  started  to  the  present  bill.  Objections  are 
to  be  anticipated  to  every  important  measure,  either  from  local  inter- 
est or  natural  diversities  of  opinion;  but  a  consideration  of  those 
offered  in  this  case  is  due  to  the  sources  from  which  they  come,  and 
will  serve,  in  my  apprehension,  to  show  their  true  character,  as  well  as 
strengthen  the  arguments  in  favor  of  repeal. 

One  of  those  objections  has  been,  that  the  bill  is  an  inroad, — that  it 
breaks  in  upon  the  permanent  system  of  our  public  revenue.  As  if  a 
tax  once  imposed,  though  under  the  iron  necessities  of  war,  was  never 
afterwards,  though  in  peace  and  abundance,  to  be  lessened  or  repealed. 
As  if,  also,  a  tax,  partial  and  unjust  in  its  operation,  could  never 
safely  be  modified.  The  facts  already  named  prove  that  the  present 
duty  on  salt  was  imposed  as  a  war-tax,  and  show  that  it  was  never,  in 
its  origin,  designed  as  a  part  of  the  permanent  system  of  our  public 
revenue.  The  evidence  of  our  own  records,  in  their  minutest  details, 
accords  with  this  general  fact:  because  this  large  duty,  when  first 
imposed,  in  1797,  was  expressly  limited  to  only  three  years ;  in  1800, 
it  was  again  limited  to  ten  years,  and,  in  1807,  entirely  repealed. 
When  imposed  anew,  in  1813,  it  was,  moreover,  expressly  confined  to 
a  year  after  the  war.  It  was  then,  as  before,  held  out  to  the  country 
as  only  a  temporary  measure ;  and  that  section  more  immediately 
aggrieved  by  it  were  soothed  with  the  siren  song,  that,  with  the  dis- 
tresses and  embarrassments  of  war,  which  had  occasioned  the  tax, 
would  also  cease  this  unequal  burthen. 

It  was  not  contended  then,  or  at  any  subsequent  period,  till  now, 
that  a  tax  so  unequal  and  exorbitant  had  been  imposed  as  a  permanent 
part  of  our  revenue  system ;  for,  beside  all  other  objections,  and  espe- 
cially the  inequalities  of  its  operation,  before  enumerated,  everybody 
can  see  that  the  whole  of  the  tax  falls  almost  exclusively  on  a  single 
section  of  the  country.  Let  us  pause  a  moment  on  this  circumstance, 
in  connection  with  the  idea  that  such  a  tax  is  to  be  permanent.  Not 
only  is  it  chiefly  paid  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  Alleghanies,  but,  even 
there,  by  a  portion  of  that  side,  as  domestic  salt  supplies  some  of  their 
population.  Our  four  and  a  half  million  bushels  of  imported  salt  (for 
in  1825  it  was  4,574,202  bushels,  and  in  1823  it  was  5,435,449 
bushels),  then,  is  about  the  average  importation,  for  a  few  years  past, 
and  is  all  consumed  by  a  population,  in  that  quarter,  not  exceeding 
four  and  a  half  millions  in  number.  What  is  used  in  the  fisheries  is 
as  much  consumed  by  that  population  as  what  is  used  at  the  dinner- 
table  or  in  the  meat-barrel.  It  thus  becomes  an  exclusive  tax  on  them 
of  twenty  cents  per  person  annually,  or  nearly  two  dollars  annually, 
to  each  agricultural  family ;  or,  in  the  State  of  New  Hampshire  alone, 
where  no  domestic  salt  is  used,  calling  her  population  only  two  hun- 


IMPORTANCE    OF   A   LOW   DUTY    ON   SALT.  21 

dred  and  fifty  thousand,  it  becomes  a  tax  of  fifty  thousand  dollars 
a  year ;  being  full  fifty  per  cent,  more,  on  a  single  necessary  of  life, 
than  the  whole  tax  on  the  people  of  that  State  for  the  support  of  their 
State  government.  If  the  data  for  this  calculation  be  the  gross  duty, 
and  be  thus  apportioned,  then  the  duty  of  1823,  for  instance,  which 
was  889,948  dollars,  after  deducting  drawbacks  for  reexportation, 
when  divided  among  the  four  and  a  half  millions  who  consume  foreign 
salt,  amounts  to  more  than  nineteen  cents  per  head,  and  leaves  the 
result  not  essentially  different.  This  enormous  tax,  likewise,  is  imposed 
thus  partially,  not  on  a  luxury,  or  even  a  mere  convenience,  which 
persons  might,  or  might  not,  part  with ;  but  on  an  article  of  daily  and 
universal  necessity,  and  almost  as  indispensable  to  health  as  the  air  for 
breathing,  or  fire  for  warmth. 

Again :  if,  in  any  permanent  system  of  revenue,  it  should  become 
expedient  to  tax  highly  the  necessaries  of  life,  it  is  palpable  that  the 
tax  should  not  be  so  disproportionate  as  the  duty  on  salt.  For,  when 
so  disproportionate,  one  article  consumed  mainly  in  one  section,  and 
another  in  another  section,  are  not  equalized  in  the  burthen  they  im- 
pose ;  because  the  highest  impost  on  other  necessaries  seldom  exceeds 
fifty  per  cent.,  while  this  impost  on  salt  is  generally  two  hundred  per 
cent.,  and  occasionally  higher.  On  tins  last  suggestion  I  shall  soon 
offer  some  particulars,  which,  it  is  hoped,  will  be  perfectly  conclusive 
as  to  the  fact  of  this  great  and  invidious  disproportion. 

But  though  this  tax  cannot,  for  these  reasons,  in  its  present  shape, 
be  deemed  a  part  of  our  permanent  revenue  system,  it  has  been  urged, 
by  the  senator  from  New  York,  that  the  amount  derived  from  it  can- 
not, at  this  time,  be  spared  by  the  government.  That  objection  is  as 
old  as  the  custom  of  taxation,  and  is  invariably  urged  against  the 
repeal  of  all  taxes.  Those  who  receive  taxes  always  wish  them  con- 
tinued, either  for  present  or  anticipated  purposes.  This  same  objection 
was  pressed,  but  pressed  in  vain,  in  1807,  though  the  amount  of 
revenue  then  relinquished  was  $515,920,  while  the  present  bill  releases 
only  $309,205.  Then,  also,  the  whole  annual  income  from  the  duty 
ceased  at  one  time,  while  now  the  half  repealed  does  not  take  effect  at 
all  till  next  December,  and  only  a  moiety  of  it  till  a  year  from  next 
December. 

The  same  objection  was,  at  first,  insisted  on  against  a  repeal  of  the 
English  excise  on  salt ;  but  was  urged  in  vain,  though  the  revenue 
released  amounted  to  more  than  six  millions  of  dollars,  or  more  than 
twenty  times  as  much  as  this  bill  proposes  to  release,  and  though  at  a 
time  when  they  needed  nearly  .£50,000,000  sterling  annually  to  dis- 
charge only  the  interest  of  their  national  debt.  But  in  both  countries, 
on  the  above  occasion,  the  governments  well  knew  that  the  impost  was 
a  war  impost,  —  was  partial  in  its  operation  and,  after  the  exigencies 
of  war  ceased,  ought  not  to  be  enforced.  They  well  knew,  further, 
that,  in  its  origin,  it  was  never  intended  as  a  part  of  their  permanent 
revenue :  and,  if  its  amount  was  desirable  in  the  financial  operations 


22  IMPORTANCE   OF   A   LOW   DUTY   ON   SALT. 

of  the  treasury,  it  would  be  far  more  just  and  wise  to  collect  it  from 
articles  of  luxury,  or  retrench,  to  that  extent,  some  large  expendi- 
ture. 

"  Better  were  it,"  says  Anderson,  in  his  Essay  on  Agriculture, 
page  330,  "for  the  inhabitants  of  this  country  to  pay  one  hundred 
times  the  amount  of  the  free  produce  of  the  duties  on  salt,  if  levied  in 
any  one  of  a  variety  of  ways  that  might  easily  be  suggested,  and  which 
do  not  bind  up  the  hands  of  industry  as  this  does."  He  intimates 
further,  what  I  hope  will  never  be  verified  in  America,  —  "  But  so  long 
as  party  cabals  shall  occupy  the  minds  of  the  leading  men  in  the  legis- 
lative and  executive  departments  of  government,  to  the  exclusion  of 
any  object  from  their  serious  thoughts  that  cannot  be  immediately 
connected  with  them,  it  is  in  vain  to  think  that  observations  which 
tend  to  promote  merely  useful  measures,  which  might,  perhaps,  affect 
the  interest  and  tend  to  disgust  some  powerful  supporters  of  either 
party,  or  their  adherents,  will  ever  command  the  attention  of  any 
party." 

The  effect  of  this  repeal,  however,  on  the  revenue,  has  commanded 
full  attention  in  this  body.  The  committees  on  finance,  during  two 
sessions,  have  deemed  this  partial  repeal  safe  and  expedient,  under  the 
present  state  of  the  finances ;  and  a  moment's  reflection  must  convince 
all  that  even  its  nominal  effect  upon  the  revenue  must  prove  much 
more  inconsiderable  than  some  have  been  inclined  to  suppose.  Firstly, 
because  the  sum  received  from  half  the  duty  now  to  be  released  is  small 
in  itself,  compared  with  the  whole  revenue,  —  being  only  about  one- 
seventieth  of  it,  —  and  is  to  be  released  at  a  future  period,  and  divided 
into  two  separate  years.  And,  secondly,  because  the  article  will  be 
likely  to  become  so  much  cheaper,  by  the  reduction  of  the  duty,  as 
probably  to  increase  its  consumption,  and  in  that  way  enable  the  gov- 
ernment to  realize,  from  the  small  duty,  almost  as  much  as  they  now 
realize  from  the  large  duty. 

I  shall  not  detain  the  Senate  by  arguments  and  analogous  cases,  to 
prove  a  position  so  well  settled  in  political  economy  as  that  a  large  duty 
seldom  or  never  yields  twice  as  much  as  a  reasonable  duty  only  half  as 
large.  Two  and  two,  in  taxation,  as  Swift  once  remarked,  seldom  makes 
four.  A  single  fact  on  this  point  will  be  sufficient.  By  the  reduction 
of  the  British  excise  thir teen-fifteenths,  it  was  calculated,  on  the  old 
amount  of  salt  consumed,  that  the  remaining  two-fifteenths  would  yield 
only  ,£200,000  per  year.  But  so  greatly  did  the  consumption 
increase,  through  the  fall  of  price,  by  means  of  lessening  the  excise, 
that  the  impost  exceeded  £360,000 ;  or,  in  other  words,  the  consump- 
tion was  nearly  doubled.  It  was  there,  and  will  be  here,  under  such 
circumstances,  employed  more  freely  in  the  feeding  of  all  kinds  of 
stock,  in  the  preservation  of  meats  and  hay,  in  manuring  the  soil,  and 
in  various  other  uses  too  numerous  for  recital. 

Again:  this  increased  consumption  would  not  only  prevent  the 
revenue  from  much  diminution,  but  would  improve  the  health,  and 


IMPORTANCE   OF  A  LOW  DUTY   ON  SALT.  23 

promote  greatly  the  pecuniary  prosperity  of  the  agricultural  class.  I 
will  not  stop  to  argue  this  point  in  detail,  any  more  than  the  preceding 
one,  with  which  it  is  intimately  connected.  It  will  suffice  to  remark, 
that  a  very  intelligent  writer  on  this  subject,  whose  work  lies  before 
me;  calculates  that  the  increased  use  of  salt,  by  removing  from  it  a 
large  tax,  would  be  so  considerable,  and  at  the  same  time  so  healthy 
and  profitable,  as  nearly  to  double  the  utility  of  the  same  quantity  of 
food  without  the  free  use  of  salt.  One  of  his  remarks  on  this  point  I 
will  read,  to  prevent  misapprehension:  "It  will  be  shown  that,  by 
the  liberal  use  of  salt  in  feeding  cattle  and  sheep,  not  only  many  dis- 
eases of  the  latter  might  be  prevented,  but  also  that  the  same  quantity 
of  food  might  be  made  to  go  much  further,  by  the  judicious  use  of  salt 
in  feeding  beasts,  than  can  be  done  without  it ;  so  that,  were  the  duty  on 
salt  removed,  and  the  free  use  of  that  condiment  adopted,  it  might  be 
said  to  augment  the  quantity  of  food  for  beasts,  I  will  not  say  one  half, 
but  in  a  proportion  somewhat  approaching  to  it,  over  the  whole  island ; 
which  is  an  article  of  such  immense  magnitude  as  almost  to  baffle  all 
attempts  at  calculation."  (And.  131.)  Yet  the  excise  in  England 
on  salt  used  for  feeding  cattle  and  sheep  was  only  two  shillings  and 
sixpence  per  bushel,  before  the  repeal. 

This  increased  consumption  will  also  confer  an  incidental  benefit 
upon  the  navigation  of  the  country.  That  navigation  is  now  employed, 
in  the  freight  of  this  article,  to  only  from  three  and  a  half  to  five  mil- 
lion bushels  annually ;  and  any  increase  of  consumption,  whether  to 
six  or  eight  millions,  will  extend  a  very  acceptable  benefit  to  the 
freighting  trade  of  the  country,  now  languishing  and  depressed. 

The  principal  remaining  objection  to  the  bill  comes  from  the  pro- 
fessed friends  to  the  domestic  manufacture  of  salt ;  and  having  been 
reinforced  by  several  memorials,  read  yesterday  and  to-day,  as  well  as 
by  eloquent  appeals  from  the  senators  of  Maine  (Mr.  Holmes)  and 
ISTew  York  (Mr.  Sanford),  I  shall  attempt  to  meet  this  objection 
in  its  fullest  and  strongest  views.  I  am  as  ready  as  any  person  to  give 
all  expedient  and  just  protection  to  any  portion  of  the  great  and  grow- 
ing branch  of  national  industry  consisting  of  manufactures.  But 
the  present  duty  on  salt  was  at  first  not  imposed  to  introduce  and 
protect  its  manufacture.  So  large  a  duty  can  never,  on  sound 
principles,  be  required  for  that  object ;  and  in  its  present  amount  it  is 
both  disproportionate  and  exorbitant.  It  was  not  imposed  for  that 
object,  either  in  1797  or  1813 ;  because,  as  we  have  seen,  it  was,  at 
both  those  periods,  imposed  for  war  purposes,  and  was  expressly  lim- 
ited in  duration,  so  as  to  meet  only  such  purposes.  The  memorials 
against  this  bill  concede  that  the  encouragement  of  manufactures  has 
only  been  an  incidental  or  secondary  effect  from  the  duty.  Again,  it 
is  contrary  to  all  analogy  and  correct  principles  of  political  economy, 
to  either  retain  or  impose  a  tax  so  large  and  unequal  for  the  protection 
of  any  manufacture  whatever.  Let  me  entreat  the  Senate  to  turn 
from  general  conjecture,  and  sympathetic  appeals  on  this  subject,  to 


24  IMPORTANCE    OF   A   LOW   DUTY   ON   SALT. 

established  facts.  When  salt  weighs  sixty  pounds  per  bushel,  which  is 
the  usual  rate,  the  duty  amounts  to  full  two  hundred  per  cent,  on  the  cost 
of  the  article ;  because  it  seldom  costs,  abroad,  over  ten  or  twelve  cents 
per  bushel.  The  price  on  the  sea-board,  as  stated  in  the  memorials  on 
your  table,  is  only  from  thirty-five  to  thirty-seven  cents,  when  weighing 
seventy-eight  pounds ;  which,  deducting  the  duty  on  that  weight,  and  the 
freight,  would  leave  the  original  cost  rather  less  than  twelve  cents. 
Another  test,  that  this  is  about  the  first  cost  per  bushel,  is  our  own 
records.  Take  the  imposts  of  1825,  and  they  are  4,574,202  bush- 
els, and  valued  at  589,125  dollars,  which  averages  twelve  cents  per 
bushel ;  and  in  the  treasury  tables  it  will  be  seen,  in  many  cases,  to  be 
estimated  at  less  than  ten  cents.  On  Turk's  Island  salt,  which  weighs 
eighty-four  pounds  per  bushel,  the  duty  ranges  from  two  hundred  to 
three  hundred  per  cent. 

Will  gentlemen  now  please  to  compare  this  duty  on  an  article  of 
universal  necessity,  firstly,  with  the  duties  on  our  greatest  luxuries  ? 
Take  wines,  not  used  by  the  poor  and  middling  classes,  but  compar- 
atively by  nabobs,  at  a  duty  not  one-half  as  large  as  that  on  salt,  or 
never  over  one  hundred  per  cent. ;  or  take  spirits  of  any  kind,  the 
greatest  moral  poison  and  curse  of  our  whole  population,  at  a  duty  never 
over  two  hundred  per  cent.  Again,  compare  the  present  impost  on  salt 
with  the  duty  on  articles  of  general  use  and  convenience,  and  whose 
manufacture  it  is  very  desirable  to  establish  on  the  firmest  basis,  —  as 
sugars,  at  a  duty  not  over  seventy-five  per  cent. ;  cottons,  not  over 
twenty-seven  to  forty  per  cent. ;  woollens,  only  thirty-seven  and  one- 
third  per  cent.  And,  lastly,  compare  it  with  what  the  senator  from 
Maine  calls  manufactures  essential  in  war,  and  hence  to  be  highly 
favored  in  peace,  —  the  duties  on  iron  not  averaging  beyond  thirty  per 
cent. ;  on  fire-arms,  not  over  thirty  to  forty  per  cent. ;  and  on  gun- 
powder itself,  only  from  twenty-five  to  forty  per  cent.  Gentlemen  are 
liable  to  err  by  dealing  too  much  in  generalities. 

Pass  the  present  bill,  and  it  is  thus  manifest  that  you  still  leave  for 
the  protection  of  the  salt  manufacturers  a  duty  of  full  one  hundred  per 
cent. ;  a  duty  treble  the  amount  of  what  the  most  judicious  politicians 
now  consider  sufficient  to  aid  any  established  manufacture,  and  a  duty 
far  exceeding  any  other  in  our  own  tariff  for  the  protection  of  the 
manufacture  of  any  article,  either  a  munition  of  war,  or  of  the  first 
necessity  in  either  war  or  peace.  Is  this  ruining  manufactures  ?  Is 
this  injustice  to  the  memorialists  on  the  table?  —  leaving  them  three 
times  as  large  protection  as  you  give  to  the  makers  of  iron,  of  woollen 
cloths,  or  of  gunpowder  ?  and  some  cents  more  than  the  present  duty 
on  imported  salt  in  England,  it  being  there,  since  January,  1825,  only 
threepence  per  bushel?  The  House  will  thus  judge  whether  the 
complaints  of  the  manufacturers  in  Massachusetts  against  the  bill  — 
especially  when  they  themselves  say  the  present  duty  was  imposed  for 
revenue,  and  not  for  their  protection  —  are  either  well-founded  or 
consistent. 


IMPORTANCE   OF  A  LOW   DUTY    ON   SALT.  25 

Again,  the  manufacture  of  salt  in  this  country  is  far  from  being  in 
its  infancy,  so  as  to  require  as  large  a  duty  as  once  might  have  been 
necessary,  if  ever  necessary.  Most  of  this  manufacture  —  all  of  it  in 
the  interior  —  is  beyond  the  power  of  tariffs  or  monopolies.  Its  found- 
ations are  not  laid  in  twenty  per  cent,  duties  or  tariffs  of  any  kind,  but 
are  laid  deep  as  those  of  the  Alleghanies  themselves.  They  are  laid 
by  God  and  nature,  in  the  distance  of  the  manufacture  from  the  sea- 
board, the  great  expense  in  the  transportation  of  so  heavy  an  article, 
and  the  small  cost  of  its  production.  These  constitute  an  unalterable, 
an  eternal  protection,  and  one  which  a  duty  of  even  two  hundred  per 
cent,  cannot  affect  beyond  a  distance  of  thirty  or  forty  miles,  —  as  it 
will  not  pay  for  its  mere  transportation  beyond  that  extent,  —  over  the 
dividing  line  of  country,  where  the  domestic  and  the  imported  salt  can 
now  be  afforded  at  equal  prices.  The  interior  manufacturers,  and  the 
prices  of  their  salt,  except  on  that  line,  and  to  that  extent,  will  remain 
as  unaffected  by  this  bill  as  they  would  be  by  a  ukase  in  Russia.  Those 
manufacturers,  if  they  ask  or  need  a  protecting  duty,  will  still  have  left 
a  protection  of  one  hundred  per  cent.,  which  is  treble  that  for  their  iron 
or  wool,  and  with  which,  I  am  conscious,  from  their  intelligence  and 
magnanimity,  all  of  them  must  remain  fully  satisfied.  The  manufac- 
turers also  on  the  sea-board  will  still  enjoy  an  equal  protecting  duty 
of  one  hundred  per  cent.  They  have  had  thirteen  years  to  establish 
themselves  under  a  duty  still  larger ;  and  if  their  works  cannot  now  be 
continued  to  advantage,  under  a  treble  protection  to  what  most  other 
manufacturers  enjoy,  it  will  not  be  difficult  to  decide  whether  any  fault 
should  be  imputed  to  Congress.  It  would  only  show  that  the  finger 
of  nature  pointed  out  to  them,  as  it  has  to  the  people  of  the  west,  from 
what  quarter  they  should  seek  their  great  supplies  of  this  article. 
They  should  seek  it  where  made  by  the  influence  of  the  sun  on  the 
ocean  that  laves  their  shores,  without  so  much  expense  or  aid  of  art. 
Of  the  extent  of  the  manufacture  on  the  whole  sea-board  I  have  no 
means  of  judging,  except  from  the  duties,  and  from  observation  in  my 
own  State :  and  on  those  I  did  suppose,  at  the  last  session,  that  the 
manufacture  was  of  such  a  character  as  to  have  diminished  even  under 
a  duty  of  two  hundred  per  cent.  If,  as  a  memorial  read  yesterday 
suggests,  it  has  rapidly  increased  and  become  extensively  established, 
then  the  legitimate  inference  for  us  is  that  it  can  now  probably  go  on 
with  a  less  duty.  And  if  the  manufacture  existed  before  the  last  war, 
when  no  duty  whatever  favored  it,  and  when  the  encouragement  by 
the  State  in  not  taxing  it  could  not  exceed  one  or  two  cents  a  bushel 
(and,  that  it  did  so  exist,  they  themselves  state),  then  also  would  it 
seem  they  might  now  go  on  with  a  duty  of  ten  cents  per  bushel. 
Their  existence  before  the  last  war,  but  not  their  great  utility  during 
the  war,  —  a  point  about  which  the  senator  from  Maine  spoke  so 
strongly,  —  was  evinced  in  a  striking  manner  by  the  recorded  fact, 
that  those  establishments,  being  necessarily  planted  so  near  the  sea- 
shore, were  often  battered  down,  and  laid  under  contribution  at  pleas- 
3 


26  IMPORTANCE   OF  A  LOW  DUTY   ON  SALT. 

ure,  by  the  enemy.  On  the  other  hand,  if  they  have  declined  since 
the  war,  it  shows  that  the  manufacture  on  the  sea-board  is  one  which 
no  reasonable  encouragement  can  there  render  flourishing;  because 
the  article  is  obtained  so  cheap  at  the  salt  islands  and  elsewhere,  and 
can  be  so  cheaply  transported  by  water  to  the  Atlantic  shore.  That 
it  had  declined  I  had  reason  to  believe,  because  every  old  establish- 
ment in  my  own  State  had  become  abandoned ;  and  because,  notwith- 
standing the  increased  manufacture  of  salt  in  the  interior,  the  use  of 
imported  salt  in  the  country  had  increased,  since  1807.  nearly  a  million 
of  bushels.  This,  it  was  supposed,  could  not  have  been  the  fact,  if 
the  manufacture  of  salt  on  the  sea-board  had  also  increased,  or  even 
remained  stationary.  But,  be  the  manufacture  on  the  sea-board 
prosperous  or  otherwise,  the  present  bill  will  not,  from  a  cause  still 
different,  be  likely  at  present,  if  ever,  to  affect  it  essentially. 

The  northern  West  India  vessels,  which  formerly  loaded  home  with 
salt,  mostly  from  the  British  islands,  are  now,  by  our  difliculties  con- 
cerning the  colonial  trade,  driven  entirely  from  that  market ;  and  the 
article  must  therefore,  to  an  extent  of  nearly  one-half  our  whole  import- 
ation, be  obtained  more  circuitously,  and  at  an  expense  somewhat 
increased,  though  probably  not  so  much  as  the  proposed  reduction  of 
the  duty.  One  other  circumstance  under  this  head.  In  speaking  of 
the  encouragement  of  manufactures  by  any  duty,  it  is  not  to  be  for- 
gotten that  the  present  disproportionate  duty  on  salt  is  a  positive 
injury  to  many  other  useful  manufactures  in  which  salt  is  an  ingre- 
dient. As  an  instance,  I  would  mention  the  manufacture  of  the  acid  so 
largely  employed  in  bleaching  cottons  and  linens.  Although  this  last 
manufacture  may  appear  of  diminished  consequence  in  the  eyes  of 
those  who  have  not  witnessed  the  great  establishments  at  the  north 
for  spinning  and  weaving  cotton,  yet  of  so  much  importance  was  it 
deemed  in  England,  that  for  twenty  years  before  the  late  repeal  of 
their  excise,  the  duty  on  salt  used  in  the  manufacture  of  that  acid  was 
greatly  lowered,  if  not  totally  remitted. 

So  far,  likewise,  as  the  reduction  of  the  duty  would  increase  the 
consumption  of  salt,  and  thus  give  employment  to  more  tonnage  in  its 
transportation,  as  we  have  before  seen  is  highly  probable,  it  would 
increase  that  most  essential  and  much  overlooked  manufacture  of  ves- 
sels,— a  manufacture,  whether  in  a  sectional  or  national  view,  of  no 
trifling  magnitude,  and  which,  by  its  iron,  canvas,  and  cordage,  is  also 
interwoven  with  many  of  our  most  valuable  establishments.  I  believe 
that  full  eight-tenths  of  the  freighting  vessels  from  New  Hampshire 
load  homeward,  more  or  less,  with  salt. 

One  or  two  collateral  considerations  have  been  so  connected  with 
this  bill  as  to  require  some  answer.  It  was  urged  at  the  last  session, 
and  has  now  been  reiirged  by  the  senator  from  Maine,  that  the  reduc- 
tion of  the  duty  on  salt  would  not  lessen  its  price  to  the  consumer. 
This  must  mean,  all  other  circumstances  affecting  the  prices  remaining 
equal  or  unchanged.     Two  replies  can  be  made  to  this  conjecture, 


IMPORTANCE   OF  A  LOW  DUTY   ON   SALT.  27 

either  of  which  might  suffice.  The  first  is,  that  if  it  will  not  lessen 
the  price  to  the  consumer,  then  the  duty  becomes  a  tax  exclusively  on 
the  importer,  and  is  thus  partial,  invidious,  and  oppressive  to  him. 
The  second  is,  that  if  it  will  not  lessen  the  price,  and,  in  consequence 
of  that  fact,  is  not  thus  partial  against  any  class  deserving  our  pro- 
tection, we  might  and  ought  to  increase  the  duty  still  further,  and 
might  safely  increase  it  to  forty  or  eighty  cents,  or  even  eight  hundred 
cents,  on  the  bushel,  and  thus  increase  our  revenue,  without  wrong 
to  anybody,  and  with  great  benefit  to  the  treasury.  Because,  if  a 
reduction  will  not  affect  the  price,  neither  would  an  augmentation ;  and 
in  this  way  the  soundness  of  the  gentleman's  reasoning  is  fairly  tested. 
We  might  thus  easily  restore  the  blessings  of  the  gabelle  on  salt  in 
France,  or  of  the  late  excise  in  England ;  and  do  it,  too,  on  that  rea- 
soning, without  injury  or  cause  of  complaint  to  any  class  of  society. 
No.  The  whole  argument  is  founded  in  misapprehension,  and  in  a 
want  of  proper  discrimination  between  the  effect  of  a  large  and  small 
duty  on  an  article  of  small  value.  It  arises  from  not  discriminating 
between  the  effect  of  any  duty  on  the  price  of  an  article,  when  the  duty 
is  equal  to  the  original  cost,  or  double  that  cost,  and  when  it  amounts 
to  only  a  small  fraction  of  that  cost. 

The  duty  on  salt  is  not  merely  a  twentieth  or  thirtieth  of  the  whole 
price  of  it  on  the  sea-board,  as  is  the  duty  on  many  other  articles,  and, 
therefore,  but  slightly  affecting  their  whole  price ;  but  it  constitutes 
two-thirds  of  the  whole  price.  This  causes  the  distinction.  Look 
also  at  real  life,  a  moment.  It  must  be  idle  to  suppose  that  the  salt 
used  in  the  fisheries,  and  in  common  purposes,  and  which  is  chiefly 
bought  of  the  importer  himself,  and  of  the  merchant  purchasing 
directly  from  the  importer,  would  not  vary  in  price,  when  the  whole 
actual  cost  per  bushel  to  the  importer  was  only  ten  or  twelve  cents, 
instead  of  thirty  or  forty  cents ;  and  that  removing  the  duty,  and  thus 
lessening  the  cost  to  him  one-half  or  two-thirds,  would  not  lessen  the 
price  he  would  be  disposed  to  ask,  or  others  would  be  willing  to  give. 
If  any  attempt  was  made  to  keep  up  the  price,  under  such  circum- 
stances, all  other  things  being  equal,  how  soon  would  the  eagle  eye  of 
enterprise  and  commercial  competition  watch  to  increase  the  importa- 
tion of  salt,  so  as  to  bring  the  market  price  to  its  just  level !  Again : 
if  the  repeal  would  not  affect  the  price,  what  becomes  of  the  gentle- 
man's argument,  that  the  manufactories  must  be  injured  or  destroyed 
by  a  reduction  of  the  duty  ?  For,  if  the  price  remains  the  same,  their 
business  will  remain  as  profitable  as  before.  The  whole  conjecture, 
however,  is  erroneous,  and,  if  pushed  through,  would  forever  prevent 
any  reduction  in  any  duty  whatever.  Indeed,  it  is  less  applicable  to 
the  case  of  salt  than  to  any  other  duty  in  the  whole  tariff,  as  the  duty 
on  that  article  constitutes  a  larger  proportion  of  its  whole  price,  in  the 
hands  of  the  importer,  than  the  duty  on  any  other  article  within  my 
recollection. 

I  cannot  consent  to  detain  the   Senate  much  longer,  and  have 


28  IMPORTANCE   OF   A   LOW   DUTY   ON   SALT. 

omitted  much  illustration  on  some  points,  which  other  gentlemen  can 
better  supply.  I  should  now  close,  without  any  further  reference  what- 
ever to  the  influence  of  this  bill  on  the  fisheries,  had  not  the  topic  been 
so  frequently  and  so  elaborately  pressed  by  others  upon  our  considera- 
tion, as  to  require  one  or  two  passing  remarks. 

In  the  first  place,  the  bill  says  nothing,  and  meditates  nothing,  about 
the  fisheries,  except  by  reducing  the  duty  to  benefit  them,  in  common 
with  other  consumers  of  imported  salt. 

In  the  next  place,  none  of  the  three  committees  by  whom  this  bill 
has  been  recommended  have  ever  uttered  a  syllable,  or  expressed  a 
wish,  to  affect  the  fisheries  by  it  unfavorably. 

Again :  if  frauds  have  been  perpetrated  in  the  fisheries,  as  repre- 
sented by  the  senator  from  Maine,  and  also  by  some  of  my  constitu- 
ents, I  have  never  named  them  as  a  reason  for  lessening  the  bounty ; 
but  trust,  with  him,  they  could  be  prevented  by  different  statutory 
regulations  on  licenses,  and  other  subjects  connected  with  that  branch 
of  business.  Nor  is  the  present  bill  the  least  obstacle,  as  he  supposed, 
to  a  continuance  of  the  present  allowance  to  the  fisheries.  This  bill 
does  not  repeal  the  whole  of  the  present  duty,  as  the  argument  would 
seem  to  imply,  and  therefore  leave  no  ground  for  any  allowance  in 
the  character  of  a  drawback ;  but  the  bounty  or  allowance  could  as 
well  be  predicted  on  the  residue  of  the  duty  as  upon  the  whole  of  it. 
This  allowance  is  not  pretended  by  him  to  be  limited  to  the  exact 
amount  of  the  duty  on  the  salt  consumed ;  else  the  repeal,  whether 
total  or  partial,  of  the  duty  and  of  the  allowance  together,  pari  passu, 
could  work  no  injury  to  the  fisheries,  as  they  would  then  have 
remitted  to  them,  in  taking  off  the  duty  on  salt,  the  precise  sum  they 
now  receive  as  a  bounty.  But  the  allowance  is  something  more  than 
the  mere  duty;  it  is  intended,  and  properly  so,  as  in  some  degree 
an  encouragement  and  protection  to  an  employment  so  profitable  to 
the  nation,  and  so  indispensable  to  its  supply  of  seamen,  both  in  peace 
and  war.  It  rests  on  broader  and  more  national  principles  than 
driving  a  hard  bargain  with  the  laborious  fisherman  about  the  mere 
drawback  of  a  duty  of  twenty  cents  per  bushel  on  salt.  It  rests  on 
such  liberal  and  statesman-like  views  as  are  disclosed  in  Mr.  Jeffer- 
son's Report  on  the  Fisheries,  in  1794.  It  rests  on  facts  now  exist- 
ing, independent  of  any  changes  in  the  tariff,  though  first  recognized 
in  the  act  imposing  a  duty  on  salt,  and  which  act  will  still  remain 
in  full  force  as  to  a  duty  of  ten  cents  per  bushel,  and  as  to  the  present 
allowance.  It  rests  on  considerations  like  these :  that,  even  with  all 
the  present  allowance,  our  fishermen  pursue  their  hardy  and  perilous 
employment  under  a  direct  bounty  of  full  a  half-dollar  less  per  ton 
than  the  British  fishermen ;  under  the  inconveniences  of  going  to  a 
greater  distance  to  cure  their  fish ;  under  a  smaller  protecting  duty  at 
home,  against  foreign  fish ;  under  the  disadvantages  that  British  fish- 
ermen pay  no  duty  whatever  on  their  salt ;  and  hence,  from  all  these 
causes,  ours  manifestly  cannot  compete  at  all,  with  less  encourage- 


RELIEF  OF  THE  SURVIVING  OFFICERS  OF  THE  REVOLUTION.       29 

ment,  or,  with  less,  continue  to  furnish  our  population  with  their 
cheap  and  healthy  articles  of  food,  as  well  as  profitable  products  for 
exportation.  "Withdraw  the  present  allowance,  and  you  cut  off,  at 
one  blow,  most  of  our  annual  exports  of  fish  and  oil,  amounting,  after 
all  the  domestic  consumption  of  those  articles,  even  to  a  million  and  a 
half  of  dollars.  I  say  most  of  them ;  for  fish  and  fish  oil,  excluding 
whale  oil,  constitute  above  two-thirds  of  all  our  annual  exports  from 
the  sea.  In  1825,  fish  alone  amounted  to  $1,078,773.  Nor  can 
the  country  ever  establish  so  good  a  nursery  for  its  navy  as  by 
encouraging  and  inuring  some  of  its  citizens  in  this  way,  in  their 
youth,  to  ocean  scenes  and  ocean  dangers, — to  cast  the  line,  and  throw 
the  harpoon,  under  every  latitude,  and  amid  every  peril.  The  prompt 
and  fearless  patriotism  of  this  class  of  men,  during  the  late  war,  as 
well  as  during  our  Revolution,  furnished  an  ample  return  for  every 
arrearage  of  favor  from  the  government.  They  will  always  richly 
repay  any  continuance  of  favor.  Nobody  who  knows  their  character 
as  I  do  will  be  unwilling  to  give  his  pledge,  that,  in  any  future  hour 
of  national  trial,  they  will  again  evince  the  same  chivalrous  devotion 
to  their  country,  and  be  ready,  at  all  times,  to  pour  out  their  blood, 
like  water,  in  defence  of  its  glory  and  its  rights.* 


RELIEF  OF  THE  SURVIVING^  OFFICERS   OF  THE  REV- 

OLUTION.f 

It  has  become  my  duty,  said  Mr.  Woodbury,  as  chairman  of 
the  committee  who  reported  this  bill,  to  explain  the  origin  and  char- 
acter of  it.  I  regret  that  this  duty  has  not  devolved  upon  some  abler 
representative  of  the  interests  of  the  petitioners ;  but  I  regret  it  the 
less,  as  my  colleagues  on  the  committee  possess  every  quality,  of  both 
the  head  and  heart,  to  advance  those  interests,  and  will,  no  doubt, 
hereafter  be  seconded  by  an  indulgent  attention  on  the  part  of  the 
Senate. 

Who,  then,  sir,  are  the  venerable  men  that  knock  at  your  door? 
and  for  what  do  they  ask  1  They  are  not  suppliants  for  mere  favor 
or  charity,  though  we  all  know  that  nothing  but  the  proud  spirit 
which  helped  to  sustain  them  through  the  distresses  of  our  Revolution 
has  withheld  most  of  them  from  reliance  for  daily  bread  on  the  alms 
provided  by  the  present  pension  act.     No,  sir !  they  come  as  peti- 

*  The  duty  was  reduced. 

t  A  speech  delivered  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  in  1828.  There  is  another 
speech  on  the  same  subject,  but  it  is  not  embraced  in  this  volume. 

3* 


30       RELIEF  OF  THE  SURVIVING  OFFICERS  OF  THE  REVOLUTION. 

tioners  for  their  rights.  They  come  as  the  remnant  of  that  gallant 
hand,  who  enlisted  your  continental  army,  who  disciplined  its  ranks, 
who  planned  its  enterprises,  and  led  the  way  to  victory  and  independ- 
ence. Confiding  in  the  plighted  faith  of  Congress,  given  in  the  form 
of  a  solemn  compact,  they  adhered  to  your  cause  through  evil  report 
and  good  report,  till  the  great  drama  closed ;  and  they  now  ask  only 
that  the  faith  so  plighted  may  be  redeemed.  Amid  the  wrecks  from 
time  and  disease,  during  almost  half  a  century,  short  of  250  now  sur- 
vive, out  of  2480  who  existed  at  the  close  of  the  war.  Even  this 
small  number  is  falling  fast  around  us,  as  the  leaves  of  autumn ;  and 
this  very  morning  a  gentleman  before  me  has  communicated  the  infor- 
mation, that  another  of  the  most  faithful  among  them  has  just  passed 
"that  bourn  whence  no  traveller  returns."  It  behooves  us,  then,  if 
we  now  conclude,  in  our  prosperity  and  greatness,  to  extend  relief, 
either  from  charity,  gratitude,  or  justice,  to  do  it  quickly. 

My  great  anxiety  is,  in  the  outset,  to  prevent  any  misapprehension 
of  the  true  grounds  on  which  the  appropriation  is  founded.  Through- 
out the  whole  inquiry,  there  is  no  disposition  to  censure  the  motives 
or  policy  of  the  old  Congress.  They  adopted  such  measures  as  the 
exigencies  and  necessities  of  the  times  forced  upon  them ;  and  now, 
when  those  exigencies  have  ceased,  it  is  just,  as  well  as  generous,  to 
give  such  relief  as  the  nature  of  the  case  may  demand. 

A  very  great  obstacle  to  the  success  of  this  measure  heretofore  has 
been  a  prevalent  opinion  that  these  petitioners  are  seeking  compensa- 
tion merely  for  losses  sustained  on  the  depreciation  of  continental 
money,  and  certificates  received  for  their  monthly  wages ;  whereas, 
from  their  first  memorial,  in  A.  D.  1810,  to  the  present  session,  they 
have  invariably  rested  on  the  non-performance,  by  Congress,  of  a 
distinct  and  independent  contract.  All  the  losses  on  their  monthly 
wages  they  bore  in  common,  and  are  willing  to  forego  in  common, 
with  many  in  the  walks  of  civil  life,  and  with  the  brave  soldiers  under 
their  command.  This  is  the  plain  and  decisive  reason  why  none  but 
officers  are  embraced  in  the  present  bill.  The  contract  on  which  they 
rely  was  made  with  the  officers  alone ;  and  gallant  and  unfortunate  as 
were  the  soldiers,  the  officers  have  endured,  and  will  continue  to 
endure,  without  repining,  still  severer  sufferings  from  the  worthless 
money  and  certificates  received  for  their  wages ;  because  those  losses 
were  perhaps  too  large,  and  too  general,  in  all  departments  of  life,  ever 
to  warrant  the  expectation,  or  practicability,  of  complete  remuneration. 
I  have  said  severer  sufferings  on  this  account  by  the  officers ;  because 
the  money  received  for  wages  before  A.  D.  1780,  worth  only  one  dol- 
lar in  the  hundred,  was,  to  the  officers,  the  only  means  to  purchase 
camp  equipage  and  clothing,  that  were  furnished  to  the  soldiers  out  of 
the  public  arsenals ;  and  because  the  soldier  often  received,  besides, 
liberal  bounties,  both  at  home  and  from  Congress. 

Let  it,  then,  be  distinctly  understood,  that,  notwithstanding  this  dis- 
parity against  the  officers,  no  such  losses  or  depreciations  form  any 


BELIEF  OF  THE  SURVIVING  OFFICERS  OF  THE  REVOLUTION.        31 

part  of  the  foundation  for  this  bill.  A  moment's  attention  to  the  his- 
tory of  that  period  will  show  the  true  ground  of  the  appropriation. 
After  this  unequal  pressure  had  continued  nearly  three  years, — after 
the  officers  had  sustained  their  spirits,  during  that  trying  period,  under 
such  disadvantages,  by  the  force  of  those  principles  that  led  them  at 
first  to  join  in  the  pledge  to  the  cause  of  "  their  lives,  their  fortunes, 
and  their  sacred  honor," — after  their  private  resources  had  become 
nearly  exhausted  in  supplying  those  wants  which  their  country  was 
unable,  rather  than  unwilling,  to  satisfy, — there  arose  a  state  of  things 
which  led  to  certain  proceedings  by  Congress  in  relation  to  half  pay. 

The  prospect  had  nearly  vanished  that  any  honorable  accommoda- 
tion could  be  effected  with  the  parent  country.  The  contest  seemed 
likely  to  become  more  severe,  and  to  be  protracted  for  many  years ; 
and  it  was  obvious  that  many  of  the  officers,  thus  impoverished  and 
disheartened,  must  actually  resign,  in  order  to  provide  themselves  with 
decent  clothing,  and  to  maintain  their  families,  and  secure  any  subsist- 
ence for  advanced  life,  or  that  they  must  receive  some  assurance  of 
future  indemnity,  if  they  continued  in  service,  and  abandoned  every- 
thing else  to  sink  or  swim  with  the  military  destinies  of  their  country. 

It  was  then  that  the  resolve  of  May  15th,  1778,  granting  half  pay, 
for  only  seven  years,  to  all  who  continued  in  service  till  the  close  of 
the  war,  was  passed. 

This  short  period  of  half  pay  was  dictated  rather  by  the  inability  of 
Congress  to  provide  a  longer  one  than  from  an  impression  that  it  was, 
in  truth,  sufficient,  or  in  accordance  with  any  similar  system  in  the 
armies  of  Europe.  Hence,  a  committee,  May  24th,  1779,  reported  a 
resolution  allowing  half  pay  for  life  to  the  same  class  of  officers,  and 
justly  grounded  it  on  the  great  risks  they  were  called  to  encounter, — on 
their  great  sufferings  and  sacrifices  of  youth,  ease,  health  and  fortune, 
in  the  cause  of  their  country.  But  the  want  of  resources  in  Con- 
gress induced  them  to  postpone  this  subject,  and,  on  the  17th  of 
August,  1779,  to  urge  upon  the  respective  States  the  expediency  of 
adopting  such  a  resolution,  and  of  pledging  for  its  fulfilment  their 
State  resources.  The  power  of  the  States  over  those  resources  was 
much  more  effective  than  that  of  the  Confederation  over  the  States. 
But  such  were  the  general  gloom  and  despondency  of  the  times,  that 
not  a  single  State,  except  Pennsylvania,  complied  with  the  recommend- 
ation. The  currency  continued  to  depreciate  more  and  more,  daily : 
the  officers,  in  many  instances,  were  utterly  unable,  by  their  whole 
pay,  to  procure  decent  apparel ;  treason  had  penetrated  the  camp  in 
the  person  of  Arnold;  Charleston  had  been  surrendered,  Lincoln 
captured,  Gates  defeated  at  Camden,  the  Southern  States  overrun  by 
Cornwallis ;  our  soldiers  had  become  discouraged,  and  the  great  military 
leader  of  the  Revolution  had  become  convinced,  and  had  urged,  with 
his  usual  energy,  upon  Congress,  that  the  adoption  of  this  resolution 
was  almost  the  only  possible  method  of  retaining  the  army  together. 
Under  such  appalling  circumstances,  Congress  passed,  on  the  24th  of 


32       BELIEF  OF  THE  SURVIVING  OFFICERS  OF  THE  REVOLUTION. 

October,  A.  D.  1780,  the  resolution  which  I  will  now  take  the  liberty 
to  read : 

"  Resolved,  That  the  officers  who  shall  continue  in  the  service  to  the  end  of  the 
war,  shall  also  be  entitled  to  half  pay  during  life,  to  commence  from  the  time  of  their 
reduction."     (1  U.  S.  Laws,  688.) 

This,  with  one  or  two  subsequent  resolutions,  explaining  and  modi- 
fying its  provisions  as  to  particular  persons,  constitutes  the  great 
foundation  of  the  bill  under  consideration.  The  promise  was  most  sol- 
emnly and  deliberately  made ;  the  consideration  for  it  was  ample,  and 
most  honorably  performed  by  the  officers ;  and  yet,  on  the  part  of 
Congress,  its  stipulations  have,  in  my  opinion,  never,  to  this  clay,  been 
equitably  fulfilled.  As  to  the  binding  effect  of  the  compact  on  Con- 
gress, nobody  can  pretend  to  doubt.  I  shall,  therefore,  not  waste  a 
single  moment  in  the  discussion  of  that  point.  But  I  admit  that  the 
officers  were  first  bound  to  perform  the  condition  faithfully  of  serving 
to  the  close  of  the  war,  however  long  or  disastrous.  Did  they  do  it '? 
History  and  tradition  must  convince  all,  that,  through  defeat  as  well  as 
victory,  they  clung  to  our  fortunes  to  the  uttermost  moment  of  the 
struggle.  They  were  actuated  by  a  spirit  and  intelligence  the  surest 
guarantees  of  such  fidelity.  Most  of  them  had  investigated,  and  well 
understood,  the  principles  in  dispute ;  and,  to  defend  them,  had  flown 
to  the  field  of  battle  on  the  first  alarm  of  war,  with  all  the  ardor  of  a 
Scottish  gathering,  at  the  summons  of  the  fiery  cross.  And  it  is  not 
poetry,  that  one  of  my  own  relatives,  an  officer,  long  since  no  more, 
when  the  alarm  was  given  at  Lexington,  left  for  the  tented  field  the 
corpse  of  his  father  unburied : 

"  One  look  he  cast  upon  the  bier, 
Dashed  from  his  eye  the  gathering  tear," 

and  hastened  to  devote  his  own  life  to  the  salvation  of  his  country.  In 
the  same  duty, — in  performing  their  part  of  the  compact,  to  serve 
faithfully  to  the  close  of  the  war, — these  petitioners  endured  the  frosts 
of  winter,  often  half  sheltered,  badly  fed,  badly  clothed,  and  badly 
paid.  God  forbid  that  I  should  exaggerate !  The  naked  truth  is 
stronger  than  any  coloring  of  fancy.  We  have  the  authority  of  their 
commander,  that  they  were,  at  times,  in  such  a  condition  as  to  be 
unable  and  ashamed  to  receive  their  friends ;  but  never,  I  believe,  loth 
to  face  their  enemies.  Their  paths  were  sometimes  marked  by  their 
blood;  their  courage  and  constancy  tried  by  frequent  alarms,  by 
ambuscade,  and  the  pitched  battle.  But  they  never  faltered;  and 
when,  towards  the  close  of  the  war,  neglect  on  the  part  of  Congress, 
as  to  their  monthly  wages,  might  have  justified,  under  most  circum- 
stances, disquiet  and  distrust;  and  when,  at  Newburg,  they  were 
tempted  with  the  insidious  taunt,  that  if,  relinquishing  their  arms  and 
retiring  home  with  the  promises  made  to  them  unfulfilled,  they  would 
"go,  starve  and  be  forgotten;"  yet  they  disbanded  in  peace,  and 
expressed  their  "unshaken  confidence  in  the  justice  of  Congress" 


RELIEF  OF  THE  SURVIVING  OFFICERS  OF  THE  REVOLUTION.        33 

Washington,  himself,  declared  in  substance,  that  by  means  of  this 
resolve  the  officers  were  inspired  to  make  renewed  exertions ;  to  feel  a 
security  for  themselves  and  families  which  enabled  them  to  devote 
every  faculty  to  the  common  cause ;  and  that  thus  was  an  army  kept 
together  which  otherwise  must  have  dissolved,  and  we  probably  have 
been  compelled  to  pass  again  under  the  yoke  of  colonial  servitude. 

For  all  this  fidelity  to  the  performance  of  their  part  of  the  com- 
pact, the  officers  have  been  duly  thanked  by  many  Congresses,  and 
applauded  by  the  world.  They  have  occupied  a  conspicuous  niche  in 
toasts,  odes,  and  orations,  and  some  of  them  have  animated  the  can- 
vas and  breathed  in  marble. 

But  has  the  promise  to  them  of  half  pay  ever  been  either  literally 
or  substantially  fulfilled?  That,  sir,  is  the  important  question.  I 
answer,  not  literally,  by  any  pretence,  from  any  quarter.  No  half 
pay,  as  such,  has  ever,  for  any  length  of  time,  been  either  paid  or 
provided  for  one  of  the  petitioners.  Almost  as  little,  sir,  can  there 
be  a  pretence  that  it  has  been  substantially  fulfilled.  No  kind  of  ful- 
filment has  been  attempted,  except  in  the  commutation  act,  passed 
March  22d,  1783. 

That  act  grew  out  of  objections,  in  some  of  the  States,  to  the  system 
of  half  pay  as  a  system,  because  not  strictly  republican  in  theory,  and 
because  everything  of  a  pension  character  had  become  odious,  by  its 
abuse,  in  some  governments,  in  the  maintenance  of  hirelings  who  had 
performed  secret  and  disreputable  services. 

Some  of  the  officers,  being  anxious  to  remove  any  formal  objection, 
petitioned  Congress  for  a  commutation  or  change  in  the  mode  of 
indemnifying  and  rewarding  them.  No  opposition  had  been  made  to 
the  amount  or  value  of  the  half  pay ;  and,  therefore,  as  appears  in  the 
commutation  act  itself,  the  officers  expected,  if  a  change  took  place,  a 
full  "  equivalent "  in  value  to  the  half  pay  for  life. 

[Mr.  W.  here  read  the  act,  from  1  United  States  Laws,  687.] 

But,  instead  of  such  an  equivalent,  Congress  gave,  by  that  act, 
what  was  far  short  of  an  equivalent,  whether  we  regard  the  particular 
ages  at  that  time  of  these  petitioners,  or  their  average  age  with  the 
other  officers,  or  the  period  they  have  actually  since  lived.  Congress 
gave  only  five  years'  full  pay  to  the  youngest  in  the  line,  and  just  as 
much  to  the  eldest, — treating  the  officer  of  twenty-five  as  not  likely 
to  live  any  longer  than  him  of  seventy ;  and  subjecting  the  former  to 
take  for  his  half  pay,  which  he  was  entitled  to  for  his  whole  life,  of 
probably  thirty-five  years,  the  same  small  sum  bestowed  on  him  not 
likely  to  live  over  ten  or  fourteen  years. 

If  we  look  to  the  average  age  of  all  the  officers  at  that  time,  the 
commutation  was  still  inadequate.  That  age  was  probably  not  over 
thirty ;  none  have  pretended  to  consider  it  over  thirty-five ;  and,  on 
all  observations  in  similar  climates,  and  all  calculations  of  annuity 
tables,  such  persons'  live3  would  be  likely  to  extend  beyond  thirty 


34       RELIEF  OF  THE  SURVIVING  OFFICERS  OF  THE  REVOLUTION. 

years ;  and  thus  their  half  pay  for  life  be,  on  an  average,  worth  the 
gross  sum,  in  presently  of  at  least  seven  years'  full  pay.  Any  gen- 
tleman can  test  the  general  accuracy  of  these  results,  by  a  reference 
to  Price's  Annuity  Tables,  and  to  Milne  on  Annuities.  In  England. 
Sweden,  and  France,  it  will  be  seen  that  a  person  of  thirty  years  of 
age  is  ascertained  to  be  likely  to  live  thirty-four  more ;  and  of  thirty- 
five  years  of  age,  to  live  about  twenty-eight  more.  An  annuity  for 
thirty-four  years  is  worth  a  fraction  more  than  fourteen  times  its 
annual  amount,  if  paid  in  a  gross  sum  in  advance;  and  one  for 
twenty-eight  years,  only  a  fraction  less  than  fourteen  times  its  annual 
amount.  So  that  seven  years'  full  pay  is  as  near  a  fair  commutation 
for  the  half  pay  for  life,  taking  their  average  ages,  as  can  well  be 
calculated,  or  as  is  necessary  for  the  present  inquiry. 

Again :  If  we  advert  to  the  real  facts,  as  since  developed,  these 
petitioners,  had  the  commutation  act  not  passed,  or  not  been  at  all 
binding,  would  now  receive  twenty-two,  instead  of  five  years'  full  pay, 
as  they  have  survived,  since  the  close  of  the  war,  over  forty-four 
years. 

Congress,  as  if  conscious  that  the  pressure  of  the  times  had  driven 
them  to  propose  a  substitute  for  the  half  pay  for  life,  not  in  any  view 
sufficient  or  equivalent,  as  regarded  the  younger  officers,  who  alone 
now  survive  and  ask  for  redress,  provided,  in  the  commutation  act, 
not  that  each  officer  might  accept  or  reject  it  at  pleasure,  but  that  it 
should  take  effect  if  accepted  within  certain  periods,  not  exceeding  six 
months,  by  majorities  in  the  several  lines  of  the  army.  The  most 
influential  officers,  in  any  line,  are  of  course  the  elder  and  superior  ones. 
To  these,  as  a  general  rule,  five  years'  full  pay  was  a  fair  equivalent ; 
and,  by  their  exertions,  the  commutation  was  accepted  by  majorities  in 
most  of  the  fines,  and  no  provision  ever  afterwards  made  for  such 
officers  as  were  either  absent  or  present,  and  dissenting. 

No  evidence  can  now  be  found,  however,  of  any  acceptance,  even 
by  majorities,  in  any  of  the  lines,  till  after  the  expiration  of  the  six 
months  prescribed.  But  a  report  of  the  Secretary  of  War,  dated 
October  31,  1783  (8  Journals  of  Congress,  478),  enumerates  certain 
lines  and  individuals  that  had  then  signified  their  acceptance.  It 
would  be  difficult,  as  might  be  expected,  to  find  among  the  individuals 
named  one  who  still  survives.  Those  then  the  youngest,  and  now 
surviving,  must  have  felt  deeply  the  inequality  proposed ;  and  if  most 
of  them  had  not  been  absent  on  furlough,  by  a  resolve  of  Congress, 
after  peace  was  expected,  probably  even  majorities  in  the  lines  would 
never  have  been  obtained.  The  certificates  were  made  out  for  all, 
without  application,  and  left  with  the  agents ;  no  other  provision  was 
made  for  those  entitled  to  half  pay,  and  it  remained  with  the  younger 
officers  to  receive  those  certificates  or  nothing. 

But  it  is  most  manifest  that  Congress  had  no  legal  right  to  take 
away  from  a  single  officer  his  vested  half  pay  for  life,  without  giving 
him  a  full  equivalent ;  or,  to  say  the  least,  what  the  officer  should 


RELIEF  OF  THE  SURVIVING  OFFICERS  OF  THE  REVOLUTION.       35 

freely  and  distinctly  assent  to,  as  a  full  equivalent.  It  would  be  con- 
trary to  the  elementary  principles  of  legislation  and  jurisprudence : 
and  a  majority  of  the  lines  could  no  more  bind  the  minority,  on  this 
subject  of  private  rights  of  property,  than  they  could  bind  Congress, 
or  the  States,  on  questions  of  politics.  This  point  need  not  be 
argued  to  men  who,  like  those  around  me,  have  watched  the  discus- 
sions and  decisions  in  this  country,  the  last  quarter  of  a  century.  But 
no  such  individual  assent  was  asked  here :  it  was,  indeed,  declared 
to  be  useless  for  any  minority  of  individuals  to  dissent ;  the  commuta- 
tion not  having  been,  in  any  view,  a  full  equivalent,  individual  assent 
cannot  fairly  be  presumed.  The  subsequent  taking  of  the  certificates 
was  merely  taking  all  that  was  provided,  and  all  they  could  get,  with- 
out any  pretence  that  they  took  it  as  a  full  and  fair  equivalent.  And 
hence  it  follows,  that,  on  the  lowest  computation,  two  years'  more  full 
pay  are  necessary  to  make  anything  like  a  substantial  fulfilment  of  the 
compact  on  the  part  of  Congress.  In  truth,  twenty  years  more  would 
be  less  than  the  petitioners  could  rightfully  claim  now,  if  the  com- 
mutation act  had  never  passed,  or  if  the  position  was  clearly  estab- 
lished, that  the  commutation  act,  as  to  them,  was  under  the  circum- 
stances entirely  void.  To  say  that  such  a  transaction,  resorted  to 
under  the  pressure  of  the  times,  and  finding  no  apology  except  in  the 
severity  and  necessities  of  that  pressure,  should  not  be  relieved  against 
when  the  pressure  is  over,  and  our  means  have  become  ample,  is 
to  make  a  mockery  of  justice,  and  to  profane  every  principle  of  good 
faith. 

But  consider  a  little  further  the  history  of  these  proceedings,  on 
the  supposition  that  the  five  years'  full  pay  was  an  ample  equivalent 
to  all.  Was  it  either  paid  or  secured  to  them  in  such  manner  as  to 
become  anything  like  a  substantial  fulfilment  of  the  promise  ?  Though 
the  act  allowed  Congress  to  give  the  officers  money  or  securities,  and 
though  these  last  might  be  in  the  form  prescribed  for  other  creditors, 
yet  the  act  contemplated  giving  them  money  or  money's  worth,  else  it 
doubly  violated  the  former  engagement  to  give  them  half  pay  for  life. 
The  very  nature  of  half  pay,  or  of  any  commutation  for  it,  implies 
that  it  should  be  actually  paid,  or  so  secured  as  to  raise  the  money 
whenever  it  becomes  due.  They  were  here  intended  as  means  for 
immediate  maintenance  or  business  to  those  who,  by  peace,  would  be 
thrown  out  of  their  accustomed  employment  and  support.  This  is  too 
plain  for  further  illustration ;  and,  in  conformity  with  these  views, 
Congress  forthwith  effected  a  loan  in  Europe,  and  paid  in  money  all 
the  foreign  officers  entitled  to  the  commutation.  But  how  were  the 
petitioners  treated  ?  They  did  not  obtain  a  dollar  in  money,  and  even 
their  certificates  were  not  delivered  till  six  or  nine  months  after  their 
right  to  half  pay  accrued;  and  when  received,  so  far  from  being 
secured  by  pledges  or  requisitions  rendering  them  valuable  as  money, 
the  officers  could  not  obtain  for  them  in  the  market  over  one-fifth  of 
their  nominal  amount.     The  receipts  given  for  these  certificates  truly 


36       RELIEF  OF  THE  SURVIVING  OFFICERS  OF  THE  REVOLUTION. 

omitted  to  state  that  they  were  in  full  payment  of  either  the  com- 
mutation or  the  half  pay.  By  such  means  these  petitioners,  to  supply 
the  then  existing  wants  of  themselves  and  families,  which  was  the 
legitimate  object  of  both  the  half  pay  and  its  commutation,  in  fact 
realized  only  one,  instead  of  five  years'  full  pay,  or  only  two  years' 
half  pay,  instead  of  half  pay  for  life. 

If  this  was  a  substantial  fulfilment  of  the  promise  to  them,  I  think 
it  would  be  difficult  to  define  what  would  have  been  a  defective,  de- 
lusive and  unsubstantial  fulfilment.  But  it  has  been  suggested  that 
the  petitioners  might  all  have  retained  their  certificates  till  afterwards 
funded,  and  in  that  event  have  escaped  loss.  Can  gentlemen,  however, 
forget  that  the  very  design  of  half  pay  was  to  furnish  food  and  raiment, 
and  not  a  fund  to  be  deposited  in  bank  for  posterity?  and  that, 
though  the  use  of  a  portion  of  it,  if  all  had  been  paid  at  once,  might 
have  been  postponed  to  a  future  period,  yet  their  necessities  utterly 
forbade  most  of  them  from  not  resorting  forthwith  to  a  single  year's 
pay,  which  was  the  entire  value  of  the  whole  certificate  1  It  is  another 
part  of  the  distressing  history  of  this  case,  that  if,  on  the  contrary, 
every  officer  had  retained  his  certificate  till  funded,  his  loss  on  it 
would  have  been  very  near  one-third  of  its  amount.  But  on  this  point 
I  shall  not  dwell,  as  its  particulars  are  more  recent  and  familiar.  It 
will  suffice  to  call  to  your  minds,  that  the  provision  made  for  the  pay- 
ment of  these  certificates  in  A.  D.  1790  was  not  by  money,  nor 
virtually  to  their  full  amount,  but  by  opening  a  loan,  payable  in  those 
certificates,  and  a  scrip  of  stock  given  for  them  on  these  terms :  one 
third  of  the  principal  was  to  draw  no  interest  whatever  for  ten  years : 
and  all  the  interest  then  due  was  to  draw  thereafter  only  three  per 
cent.  Without  going  into  any  calculations  of  the  value  of  different 
kinds  of  stock,  under  different  circumstances,  it  is  obvious  that  such  a 
payment  or  security  was  not  worth  so  much,  by  nearly  a  third,  as  the 
money  would  have  been  worth,  or  as  scrip  would  have  been  worth  for 
the  whole  then  due  on  six  per  cent,  interest. 

It  is  true  that  this  loan  was,  in  form,  voluntary ;  but  it  is  equally 
true,  that,  as  no  other  provision  was  made  for  payment,  no  alternative 
remained  but  to  accept  the  terms.  Hence,  if  the  officer  sold  his  cer- 
tificate from  necessity,  he  obtained  only  one-fifth  of  the  amount  therein 
promised ;  or,  if  he  retained  it,  he  obtained  only  about  two-thirds  of 
that  amount. 

What  renders  this  circumstance  still  more  striking,  we  ourselves  have 
in  this  way  saved,  and  reduced  our  national  debt  below  what  it  would 
have  been,'  many  millions  of  dollars,  — from  eighteen  to  fifteen,  I  believe, 
— and  yet,  now,  in  our  prosperity,  hesitate  to  restore  what  was  taken  in 
part  from  these  very  men,  and  when  not  from  them,  taken  from  others 
on  account  of  their  speculations  on  these  very  men,  and  their  associates 
in  arms.  It  was,  at  the  time  of  the  funding,  thought  just,  and  at- 
tempted by  some  of  our  ablest  statesmen,  to  provide  some  retribution 
to  the  original  holders  of  certificates  for  the  losses  that  had  been  sus- 


RELIEF  OF  THE  SURVIVING  OFFICERS  OF  THE  REVOLUTION.        37 

tained  on  them  —  to  provide  in  some  way  a  partial  restoration.  But 
the  inherent  difficulty  of  the  subject,  and  the  low  state  of  our  resources, 
prevented  us  from  completing  any  such  arrangement,  though  we  were 
not  prevented  from  saving  to  the  government,  out  of  those  very  cer- 
tificates, and  similar  ones,  ten  times  the  amount  now  proposed  for  these 
petitioners. 

On  this  state  of  facts,  then,  I  hold  these  conclusions  :  That  what  is 
honest,  and  moral,  and  honorable,  between  debtor  and  creditor  in 
private  life,  is  so  in  public  life.  That  a  creditor  of  the  public  should 
be  treated  with  at  least  equal,  if  not  greater  kindness,  than  the  creditor 
of  an  individual.  That  when  the  embarrassments  of  a  debtor  give  rise 
to  a  mode  of  payment  altogether  inadequate  to  what  is  justly  due,  and 
this  kind  of  payment  is  forced  upon  the  creditor  by  the  necessities  of 
either  party,  the  debtor  ought,  when  relieved  from  his  embarrassments 
or  necessities,  to  make  ample  restitution.  That  it  is  the  dictate  of 
every  moral  and  honorable  feeling  to  supply  the  deficiency ;  and 
especially  should  the  debtor  do  this  where  the  inadequacy  was  more 
than  four-fifths  of  the  whole  debt ;  where  the  debtor,  by  a  part  of  the 
arrangement,  saved  millions  to  contribute  to  his  present  prosperity, 
and  where  the  debt  itself  was,  as  in  the  present  case,  the  price  of  blood 
lavished  for  the  creditor,  the  wages  of  those  sufferings  and  toils  which 
secured  our  present  liberties,  and  fill  the  brightest  page  of  glory  in  our 
country's  history.  The  great  military  leader  of  the  Ke volution  has 
given  his  sanction  to  this  measure,  in  the  strongest  terms,  when,  call- 
ing to  mind  the  lion  hearts  and  eagle  eyes  that  had  surrounded  and 
sustained  him  in  all  his  arduous  trials,  and  reflecting  that  they, — not 
soldiers  by  profession,  nor  adventurers,  but  citizens,  with  tender  ties 
of  kindred  and  friendship,  and  with  cheering  prospects  in  civil  life,  — had 
abandoned  all  to  follow  him,  and  to  sink  or  swim  with  the  sacred  cause 
in  which  he  had  enlisted,  he  invoked  towards  them  the  justice  of  his 
country,  and  expressed  the  fullest  confidence  that  "  a  country  rescued 
by  their  arms  will  never  leave  unpaid  the  debt  of  gratitude." 

It  is  hot  to  be  forgotten  that  a  measure  like  this  would  remove  a 
stain  from  our  history.  Its  moral  influence  on  our  population,  in 
future  wars,  —  for  wars  we  must  expect,  again  and  again,  —  its  conso- 
nance with  those  religious,  as  well  as  moral  principles  of  perfect  justice, 
which,  in  a  republic,  are  the  anchor  and  salvation  of  all  that  is  valu- 
able ;  its  freedom,  I  trust,  from  political  prejudice  and  party  feeling, 
—  all  strengthen  the  other  reasons  for  its  speedy  adoption. 

Nor  have  the  imputations  against  it,  as  a  local  measure,  been  at  all 
well  founded.  What  is  right  or  just  in  regard  to  contracts,  is  right 
without  regard  to  the  residence  of  individuals,  whether  in  the  east,  the 
west,  or  the  south.  But,  independent  of  that  consideration,  these 
venerable  worthies,  though  once  much  more  numerous  at  the  north 
than  elsewhere,  have  since  followed  the  enterprises  of  their  children, 
and  pushed  their  own  broken  fortunes  to  every  section  of  the  Union. 
It  is  impossible  to  obtain  perfect  accuracy  as  to  their  numbers  and 


38       BELIEF  OF  THE  SURVIVING  OFFICERS  OF  THE  REVOLUTION. 

residence.  But,  by  correspondence  and  verbal  inquiries,  it  is  ascer- 
tained that  four  or  five  survive  in  New  Hampshire ;  from  thirty  to 
thirty-five  in  Massachusetts  and  Maine ;  five  or  six  in  Rhode  Island ; 
five  in  Vermont ;  sixteen  in  Connecticut ;  twenty  in  New  York ; 
twelve  in  New  Jersey ;  eighteen  in  Pennsylvania ;  three  in  Delaware ; 
twelve  in  Maryland ;  thirty-three  to  thirty-eight  in  Virginia  and  Ken- 
tucky ;  ten  to  twelve  in  Ohio ;  twelve  or  fifteen  in  the  Carolinas,  and 
five  or  six  in  Georgia.  As,  by  the  annuity  tables,  something  like 
two  hundred  and  fifty  ought  now  to  be  alive,  the  computations  have 
been  made  on  a  medium  of  two  hundred  and  thirty,  between  the  num- 
ber ascertained  and  the  conjectural  number. 

The  question,  then,  is  of  a  general,  public  nature,  and  presents  the 
single  point,  whether,  in  the  late  language  of  an  eloquent  statesman  of 
New  York,  these  veterans  shall  any  longer  remain  "  living  monuments 
of  the  neglect  of  their  country." 

All  the  foreign  officers  whose  claims  rested  on  the  same  resolve 
were,  as  I  have  before  stated,  promptly  paid  in  specie ;  and  their  illus- 
trious leader,  Lafayette,  by  whose  side  these  petitioners  faced  equal 
toils  and  dangers,  has  been  since  loaded  with  both  money  and  applause. 
Even  the  tories,  who  deserted  the  American  cause,  and  adhered  to  one 
so  much  less  holy  and  pure,  have  been  fully  and  faithfully  rewarded 
by  England;  and  it  now  remains  with  the  Senate  to  decide, — not 
whether  the  sum  proposed  shall  be  bestowed  in  mere  charity,  however 
charity  may  bless  both  him  that  gives  and  him  that  takes, — nor  in  mere 
gratitude,  however  sensible  the  petitioners  may  be  to  the  influence  of 
either, — but,  whether,  let  these  considerations  operate  as  they  may, 
the  officers  should  be  remunerated  for  their  losses,  on  those  broad  prin- 
ciples of  eternal  justice  which  are  the  cement  of  society,  and  which, 
without  a  wound  to  their  delicacy  and  honest  pride,  will,  in  that  event, 
prove  the  solace  and  staff  of  their  declining  years. 

I  shall  detain  the  Senate  no  longer,  except  to  offer  a  few  remarks 
on  the  computations  on  which  the  sum  of  $1,100,000  is  proposed  as 
the  proper  one  for  filling  the  blank.  Various  estimates,  on  various 
hypotheses,  are  annexed  to  the  report  in  this  case,  and  others  will 
doubtless  occur  to  different  gentlemen.  But  if  any  just  one  amounts 
to  about  the  sum  proposed,  no  captious  objection  will,  I  trust,  be 
offered  on  account  of  any  trifling  difference.  It  is  impossible,  in  such 
cases,  to  attain  perfect  accuracy ;  but  the  estimates  are  correct  enough, 
probably,  for  the  present  purpose. 

The  committee  have  proposed  a  sum  in  gross  rather  than  a  half 
pay  or  annuity,  because  more  appropriate  to  the  circumstances  of  the 
case,  and  because  more  acceptable,  for  the  reasons  that  originally  gave 
rise  to  the  commutation. 

On  the  ground  that  these  officers  were,  in  1783,  justly  entitled  to 
two  years'  more  full  pay,  as  a  fair  equivalent  for  half  pay  during  life ; 
and  there  being  230  of  them  of  the  rank  supposed  in  the  report,  their 
monthly  pay  would  be  about  $30  each.     This,  for  two  years,  would 


RELIEF  OF  THE  SURVIVING  OFFICERS  OF  THE  REVOLUTION.       39 

be  $720  each,  or  $165,600  due  to  these  petitioners,  at  the  close  of 
the  war,  over  and  above  what  they  then  received  certificates  for.  The 
interest  on  that,  for  forty-four  years,  would  be  $437,184,  which, 
added  to  the  principal,  makes  $602,784. 

If  to  that  be  added  what  they  lost  on  their  certificates  by  depre- 
ciation, which,  at  four-fifths,  was  $331,200,  the  sum,  without  any 
interest  on  the  depreciation,  amounts  to  $933,984;  or,  with  interest, 
to  more  than  a  million  and  a  half;  or,  if  the  depreciation  be  considered 
seven-eighths,  as  it  really  was,  the  sum  would  be  still  larger.  On 
the  other  hand,  if  nothing  be  allowed  for  depreciation  on  the  certifi- 
cates, but  one-third  be  considered  as  lost  in  funding,  that  one-third, 
in  A.  D.  1791,  would  be  about  $204,240,  and  interest  since  would 
swell  it  to  $645,434,  which,  added  to  the  two  years'  pay  not  received, 
and  interest  on  that  pay,  makes  the  whole  $1,248,218. 

Another  view  of  the  case,  which  seems  to  me  the  most  technical, 
and  which  avoids  all  difficulty  about  loss,  either  by  depreciation 
or  funding,  will  lead  to  about  the  same  result  as  to  the  amount. 
It  is  this.  On  the  ground  that  seven  years'  full  pay  was  the  smallest 
sum  which,  in  A.  D.  1783,  could  be  deemed  a  fair  equivalent  for  the 
half  pay  for  life,  then  the  petitioners  got  certificates  for  only  five- 
sevenths  of  their  half  pay ;  or,  in  other  words,  five-sevenths  of  their 
claim  was  extinguished  and  paid.  The  other  two-sevenths,  then,  has 
annually  accrued  since,  and  will  continue  to  accrue  while  the  petition- 
ers survive.  This  two-sevenths  being  $51.42  per  year  to  each  offi- 
cer, or  $11,826  to  these  officers,  would  amount  at  this  time  to  $520,- 
344 ;  and  the  interest  accruing  on  it,  during  only  thirty-five  years, 
would  make  it  exceed  the  $1,100,000  proposed.  The  amount  is 
fairly  reached  by  this  view  of  the  case,  without  a  single  cent  for  either 
depreciation  or  loss  in  funding,  and  thus  does  not  indirectly  touch  a 
single  fact  or  principle  upon  which  a  similar  allowance  could  be  made 
to  anybody  besides  these  officers.  Gallant,  and  meritorious,  and 
suffering,  as  were  the  soldiers, — and  none  could  be  more  so, — worthy 
and  affectionate  as  may  have  been  the  surviving  widows,  and  distin- 
guished as  may  have  been  many  of  the  officers'  heirs,  for  filial  and 
generous  devotion  to  smooth  their  declining  years, — they  all  stand  on 
their  own  cases  and  merits.  None  of  them  have  been  referred  to  the 
committee  who  reported  this  bill ;  and  they  can  all  be  provided  for 
otherwise,  this  session,  or  hereafter,  if  thought  proper.  Let  the  pres- 
ent appropriation  be  tried  first  on  its  own  grounds,  and  then,  by  sub- 
sequent amendments  of  this  bill,  or  by  new  bills,  let  an  appropriation 
for  other  classes  of  persons  be  also  tried  on  its  own  grounds.  All  I 
ask  and  entreat  is,  that  if,  either  in  strict  law  or  in  justice,  whether 
grounded  upon  the  original  defective  commutation,  the  depreciation  of 
the  certificates,  or  the  loss  in  funding,  any  member  is  convinced  that 
the  sum  proposed  to  the  officers  is  a  fair  one,  that  he  will  first  con- 
sider the  case  of  the  officers,  and  support  this  motion.  If  any  think 
a  different  sum  more  proper,  I  hope  they  will  propose  that  sum  in  due 


40      RELIEF  OF  THE  SURVIVING  OFFICERS  OF  THE  REVOLUTION. 

time ;  and  thus  let  the  sense  of  the  Senate  be  fully  expressed  upon  one 
case  at  a  time,  and  upon  the  only  case  now  duly  before  us.  In  this 
manner  only  can  anything  ever  be  accomplished. 

The  amount  of  the  sum  now  proposed  cannot  be  objected  to  on  the 
grounds  that  doubtless  caused  the  losses  and  sufferings  which  we  are 
now  seeking  to  redress.  The  country  during  the  Revolution,  and  at 
its  close,  would  hardly  have  been  unwilling  to  bestow  twice  the 
amount,  had  its  resources  permitted.  But  now,  such  have  been  our 
rapid  advances  in  wealth  and  greatness,  by  means  of  the  rights  and 
liberties  the  valor  of  these  men  contributed  so  largely  to  secure,  that 
the  very  public  land  they  defended,  if  not  won,  yields  every  year  to 
our  treasury  more  than  the  whole  appropriation.  One-twentieth  of 
our  present  annual  revenue  exceeds  it.  A  fraction  of  the  cost  of  the 
public  buildings,  the  expense  of  two  or  three  ships-of-the-line,  one- 
tenth  of  what  has  been  saved  to  our  national  debt  in  the  funding 
system,  a  tax  of  ten  cents  per  head  on  our  population  only  a  single 
twelvemonth, — either  of  them  would  remove  all  this  reproach. 

But,  whatever  might  be  the  cost,  I  would  say,  in  all  practicable 
cases,  be  just  and  fear  not.  Let  no  illiberal  or  evasive  feeling  blast 
the  hopes  of  these  venerable  patriots.  Much  longer  delay  will  do  this 
as  effectually  as  a  hard-hearted  refusal,  since  the  remains  of  them  are 
almost  daily  going  down  to  the  city  of  silence.  Either  drive  them, 
then,  at  once  from  your  doors,  with  taunts  and  in  despair,  or  sanction 
the  claim.  So  far  as  regards  my  single  self,  before  I  would  another 
year  endure  the  stigma  of  either  injustice  or  ingratitude  to  men  like 
these,  I  would  vote  to  stop  every  species  of  splendid  missions,  I  would 
cease  to  talk  of  Alleghany  canals,  I  would  let  the  capitol  crumble  to 
atoms  for  want  of  appropriations,  and  introduce  retrenchment  from  the 
palace  to  the  humblest  door-keeper. 

It  has  formerly  been  said,  that  if  these  officers  are  relieved,  so  must 
be  those  of  the  late  war.  But,  deserving  as  were  these  last,  the  cause 
in  which  they  fought  required  much  inferior  sacrifices.  They  were  not 
contending  under  the  stigma  of  traitors,  liable  to  the  halter;  they 
were  liberally  and  promptly  paid ;  and,  whatever  small  depreciation 
may  have  existed  in  the  treasury  notes  taken  for  their  monthly  pay,  it 
was  infinitely  less  than  the  losses  sustained  by  these  petitioners  on 
their  monthly  pay,  and  for  which  they  neither  ask  nor  expect  relief. 

One  other  consideration,  and  I  will  at  this  time  trouble  the  Senate 
no  longer.  The  long  lapse  of  time  since  the  claim  originated  has  been 
objected  formerly  to  its  success.  But  what  honest  individual  shelters 
himself  under  a  statute  of  limitation,  if  conscious  that  his  promise  has 
not  been  substantially  fulfilled  1  Under  such  circumstances,  it  is  no 
defence,  either  in  the  court  of  conscience  or  in  a  court  of  honor ;  and 
Congress  have  often  shown  their  liberality  in  waiving  it,  where 
expressly  provided  to  bar  an  application. 

Here  no  express  bar  has  ever  been  provided.  Before  their  first 
application,  the  officers  waited  till  A.  D.  1810,  when  old  age  and 


JUDICIARY  OF  THE  UNITED   STATES.  41 

infirmity  rendered  them  more  needy,  and  when  many  years  of  pros- 
perity had  rendered  their  country  more  able.  However  numerous, 
and  technical,  and  evasive,  may  have  been  the  objections  since  inter- 
posed, let  it  not  be  forgotten  that,  in  performing  their  portion  of  the 
compact,  however  neglected  as  to  food  or  wages,  they  never  were 
heard  to  plead  excuses  or  evasions,  however  appalling  the  danger, 
whether  roused  by  a  midnight  alarm  or  invited  to  join  a  forlorn  hope. 

Like  others,  too,  it  may  be  imputed  to  them,  in  derogation,  that 
they  were  "  military  chieftains."  But  if,  as  such,  for  a  time,  they 
did,  like  others,  nobly  help  "to  fill  the  measure  of  their  country's 
glory,"  so,  like  others  of  that  class,  they  have  often  distinguished 
themselves  in  forums,  cabinets  and  halls  of  legislation. 

Whatever  "  honor  and  gratitude  "  they  have  yet  received  is  deeply 
engraven  on  their  hearts ;  but  they  now  also  need — and  they  ask 
only  because  they  need — the  additional  rewards  of  substantial  justice. 

It  remains,  sir,  for  us,  whose  rights  they  defended  and  saved,  to  say 
whether  they  shall  longer  ask  that  justice  in  vain.    . 


JUDICIARY  OF   THE  UNITED   STATES.* 

Mr.  Woodbury  offered  the  following  motion : 

'*  That  the  Bill  to  extend  the  Judicial  System  be  recommitted  to  the  Committee  on 
the  Judiciary,  with  instructions  to  report  such  amendments  as  will  remove  any  exist- 
ing grievance,  without  an  increase  of  the  number  of  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court." 

He  addressed  the  Senate  as  follows :  The  gentlemen  near  me, 
sir,  ask  for  my  views  in  submitting  the  motion  on  your  table.  The 
task  is  one  I  undertake  with  reluctance ;  but,  at  the  same  time,  one 
from  which  I  have  no  right  to  shrink,  and  which  shall  be  discharged 
with  all  practicable  brevity. 

The  strong,  the  prominent  feature  of  this  bill  is,  in  my  eye,  its 
extraordinary  increase  of  the  number  of  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court. 
Before  yielding  my  approbation  to  such  an  increase,  I  feel  anxious  to 
obtain  further  facts  and  principles  in  illustration  of  its  necessity ;  and 
as  the  particular  friends  of  the  bill  unquestionably  think  that  abundant 
reasons  exist  for  so  novel  a  measure,  this  motion  must  afford  gratifi- 
cation to  them,  and  be  received  in  the  spirit  of  kindness,  as  it  will 
afford  them  the  opportunity,  doubtless  desirable,  to  spread  those 
reasons  before  persons  of  less  local  knowledge  concerning  the  region 
of  country  whose  grievances  the  bill  is  particularly  designed  to  remove. 

I  am  thus  exposing  myself  to  become  a  convert  to  their  opinions, 
rather  than  cherishing  any  vanity  of  my  power  to  convert  others. 

*  A  speech  on  the  Judiciary  Bill,  and  against  the  increase  of  judges  ;  delivered  in 
the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  April  11,  1826. 

4* 


42  JUDICIAEY   OF  THE   UNITED   STATES. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  motion  presents  only  a  single  point  of 
specific  instruction  as  to  the  bill  which  may  be  prepared  for  their 
relief ;  leaving  the  committee  to  adopt,  for  our  future  consideration, 
any  efficient  scheme  whatever,  which  shall  not  enlarge  the  Supreme 
Court. 

If  the  motion  should  prevail,  additional  instructions,  by  other 
motions,  can  be  proposed  by  gentlemen  who  are  friendly  to  particular 
plans :  such  as  the  circuit  plan,  with  the  attendance  of  a  judge  of  the 
Supreme  Court  once  a  year;  or  such  a  plan,  dispensing  with  his 
attendance  altogether ;  or  any  other  which  the  observation  and  reflec- 
tion of  those  around  me  may  have  satisfied  them  is  most  eligible. 

But,  should  this  motion  not  prevail,  then  the  consideration  of  any 
of  these  plans  would  be  useless ;  and  hence  I  desire  to  put  to  the 
Senate  the  single,  unembarrassed,  and  naked  question,  whether  they 
believe  any  exigency  now  exists  which  demands  and  justifies  the 
unprecedented  increase  of  the  Supreme  Court  to  ten  ?  Has  anything 
been  exhibited  to  us  which  renders  such  an  increase  necessary,  proper, 
or  safe  1 

In  an  attempt  to  obtain  some  certainty  as  to  the  operation  of  this 
increase  in  the  members  of  that  court,  and  as  to  the  real  reasons 
which  exist  for  the  increase,  so  that  the  Senate  can  act  understand- 
ingly  upon  the  present  motion,  we  shall  not,  it  is  hoped,  be  misled  by 
the  title  of  the  bill.     The  living  principle  of  any  measure  lies  deeper. 

The  title  is  merely  "to  extend  the  judicial  system,"  and  not  to 
alter  or  amend  it :  so  the  title  to  the  act  of  February  13,  1801,  was 
to  "provide  for  the  more  convenient  organization  of  the  courts,"  &c. 

But  as  that,  under  the  then  condition  of  the  country,  was  not  long 
found  by  the  people  to  be  very  "  convenient,"  so  this  will  not  be  found 
a  mere  extension  of  our  judicial  system  to  places  where  it  never  before 
prevailed.  The  judicial  system  now  in  operation  in  all  the  nine  States 
covered  by  tins  bill  has  been  a  part  of  the  judicial  system  of  the  Union, 
with  the  exception  of  about  one  year,  ever  since  the  first  judiciary 
act  of  A.  D.  1789,  to  the  present  moment.  Because  we  all  know  that, 
for  local  duties,  District  Courts  and  Circuit  Courts  have  ever  been 
this  system,  with  the  right  of  appeal,  in  certain  cases,  to  the  Supreme 
Court ;  and  that  the  only  difference,  in  different  regions,  has  been 
simply  what  now  exists  in  some  of  these  nine  States,  and  in  parts  of 
some  Atlantic  States,  —  namely,  that  in  new  and  thinly-peopled 
sections  of  country  the  Circuit  Courts  have  been  held  by  a  district 
judge  alone. 

But  the  proposed  bill  not  only  alters  this  system  for  local  purposes, 
by  requiring  the  attendance  of  an  additional  judge  at  the  Circuit 
Court  in  regions  of  country  not  so  populous  as  those  where  the  judges 
of  the  Supreme  Court  now  attend,  but  it  alters  the  system  for  general 
purposes,  by  enlarging  the  Supreme  Court  itself  one-half  its  whole 
original  number,  by  leaving  its  quorum  so  that  contradictory  decisions 
may  constantly  be  made  without  any  change  in  the  court  itself,  and 


JUDICIARY  OF  THE  UNITED   STATES.  43 

by  increasing  it  to  as  great  an  extent  as  a  majority  of  its  present 
quorum,  so  that  new  results  may  possibly  be  produced  in  all  its  grand 
supervising  powers  over  each  State,  and  over  the  whole  Confederation. 

It  is  thus  that  a  principle  lurks  in  the  last  effect  of  this  great  alter- 
ation, which,  in  the  opinion  of  many,  should  carry  anxiety  and  dismay 
into  every  heart;  because,  among  other  objections,  hereafter  to  be 
noticed,  it  places  at  the  mercy  of  the  legislative  breath,  in  any  moment 
of  over-heated  excitement,  all  that  is  valuable  in  any  constitutional 
judgment  on  its  records.  We  have  only,  as  in  this  case,  to  add  a 
number  to  any  court  sufficient  to  balance  a  majority  of  its  quorum, 
and,  by  a  union  of  feeling  with  the  appointing  power,  secure  judges 
of  certain  desirable  opinions,  and  any  political  or  constitutional 
decision  can,  in  the  next  case  which  arises,  be  overturned.  Every 
security  is  thus  prostrated.  The  system  is  not  extended ;  but  is,  in 
principle,  destroyed.  For  thus  does  this  increase  open  an  avenue  to 
a  radical  change  in  the  highest  functions  of  one  great  department 
of  our  government ;  and  a  department,  too,  of  all  others,  the  most 
endangered  by  any  change,  because,  in  its  very  nature,  designed  for 
.permanency,  independence,  and  firmness,  amidst  those  tempests  which, 
at  times,  convulse  most  of  the  elements  of  society. 

Gentlemen  must  perceive  that  I  speak  only  of  the  general  tendency 
and  alarming  character  of  such  an  increase,  without  reference  to  the 
motives  winch  have  now  recommended  it.  They  are,  doubtless,  pure. 
But  its  propriety  is  to  be  tried  by  the  reasons  for  it,  and  not  by 
motives.  And,  without  stopping  to  trouble  the  House  with  any  detail 
as  to  further  inconveniences,  injuries,  and  dangers,  from  this  extraor- 
dinary increase  in  so  important  a  department,  let  me  ask,  sir,  what 
are  its  justifications  ?  By  whom  is  it  called  for  ?  Who  has  stood 
forth  and  proclaimed  that  public  sentiment  throughout  the  Union  has 
demanded  it?  Whatever  may  be  the  jealousies  and  apprehensions 
concerning  the  general  course  of  decisions  in  that  court,  so  eloquently 
sketched  by  the  chairman  of  the  judiciary  committee,  who  has  shown 
the  loss  of  public  confidence,  the  errors  of  opinion,  or  denial  of  justice, 
by  that  court,  which  this  great  increase  of  its  numbers  is  sought  and 
is  adapted  to  correct  ?  No,  sir.  I  undertake  to  aver  that,  so  far  as 
this  bill  alters  the  Supreme  Court  itself,  by  that  increase,  and  thus 
affects  its  discharge  of  all  its  general  duties  as  the  supreme  consti- 
tutional court  for  the  whole  Confederacy,  it  is  a  bill  entirely  uncalled 
for  by  the  whole  Confederacy,  or  perhaps  by  any  part  of  it ;  and,  at 
the  same  time,  it  is  entirely  unfitted  to  remove  any  actual  grievance 
which  exists  in  the  discharge,  by  that  court,  of  those  general  duties. 

The  fallacy  of  the  measure  consists  in  this :  This  bill  is  to  be 
passed  mainly  for  the  removal  of  local  evils,  now  existing  in  the  west 
and  south-west.  Such  has  been  the  argument.  Thence  come  the 
complaints.  Why  not,  then,  remove  those  evils,  as  my  motion  pro- 
poses, without  touching  the  Supreme  Court  ?  Why  not  make  the 
remedy  coextensive  only  with  the  disease  ?     I  do  not  now  consider  the 


44  JUDICIARY   OF  THE  UNITED   STATES. 

delay  in  the  Supreme  Court  itself,  for  I  shall  hereafter  show  that  this 
bill  will  not  diminish  any  delay  in  the  Supreme  Court.  But,  as  a 
cure  for  a  mere  local  disease,  why  should  you  begin  to  tamper  with 
parts  of  the  system  not  disordered?  You  will  thus  jeopard,  if  not 
sacrifice,  the  primary  and  most  momentous  duties  of  that  court,  for 
the  relief  of  some  sectional  inconvenience ;  you  will  make  the  head 
and  heart  tributary  to  one  of  the  extremities ;  and,  for  the  gratification 
of  two  or  three  millions  of  people  in  the  inferior  duties  of  our  judiciary, 
you  will  put  in  peril,  not  only  the  interest  of  the  other  seven  or  eight 
millions,  but  the  interest  of  the  two  or  three  millions  —  of  the  whole 
Union,  in  all  the  paramount,  original,  and  appellant  powers  of  the  great 
judicial  tribunal  of  the  country. 

Is  it  possible  that  the  local  evils  which  exist  in  the  valley  of  the 
Mississippi  can  be  such  as  to  justify  so  extraordinary  a  measure? 
Where  are  the  petitions  and  remonstrances  on  this  subject  from  con- 
ventions or  legislatures  ?  Here  is  a  bill,  whose  local  operation  reaches 
nine  States;  but  not  more  than  one  of  that  brilliant  galaxy  has 
memorialized  us  for  relief.  The  bar  of  a  single  city  in  Tennessee,  and 
the  bar  of  some  part  of  Ohio,  have  petitioned  us ;  but,  however  respect- 
able  these  sources  of  complaint,  is  it  all  you  would  expect,  if  an  actual 
necessity  existed  for  so  important  a  bill  ? 

I  shall  not  now  discuss  the  abstract  and  metaphysical  propriety  of  a 
call  for  our  legislation  by  a  sovereign  State;  but  I  appeal  to  our 
knowledge  of  human  nature,  and  to  human  usages,  if  we  should  not, 
probably,  see  different  remonstrances,  if  the  grievances  were,  in  fact, 
so  wide-spread  and  acute  as  to  require,  for  their  removal,  so  unusual  a 
bill.  But  intelligent  gentlemen  on  this  floor  have  stated  their  impres- 
sions as  to  the  character  and  extent  of  those  grievances.  Their 
statements  are  entitled  to  the  utmost  respect  and  consideration. 

If  I  understand  them,  as  now  and  heretofore  disclosed,  they  are  all 
resolvable  into  a  supposed  want  of  equality  between  those  nine  States 
and  the  rest  of  the  Union  in  their  judiciary. 

And,  without  tracing  all  the  Protean  shapes  which  conjecture  and 
argument  have  assumed,  I  will  frankly  admit,  that,  if  such' a  want 
of  equality  exists  there  as  is  so  fatal  to  the  administration  of  justice 
as  to  require  for  its  removal  this  large  increase  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  I  earnestly  pray  that  my  motion  may  fail.  For,  without 
vaporing  about  my  regard  for  the  west,  —  which  those  only  can  doubt 
to  whom  I  am  unknown,  —  and  without  claiming  any  exclusive  merit 
for  broad,  statesman-like  views,  I  would  extend  any  proper  relief  as 
readily  to  Missouri, — however  western  or  small,  and  whether  born 
under  a  good  or  an  evil  star, — as  to  that  Pilgrim  State,  whose  arms, 
literature,  and  arts  and  commerce,  have  crowded  her  history  with 
such  proud  trophies  since  the  landing  at  Plymouth  rock. 

Proceeding,  then,  to  analyze  this  general  want  of  equality,  it  must, 
if  true,  be  found  to  consist  either  in  a  want  of  an  equal  representa- 
tion on  the  bench  of  the  Supreme  Court,  or  in  the  want  of  an  equal 


JUDICIARY    OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  45 

system  of  inferior  courts,  or  more  comprehensively  in  the  want  of  an 
equal  attention  to  their  unusual  quantity  of  judicial  business. 

In  an  examination  of  their  want  of  an  equal  representation  on  the 
bench  of  the  Supreme  Court,  I  care  not  whether  the  increase  be 
asked  because  it  is  necessary  to  give  them  equality  on  the  ground  of 
comparative  population,  on  the  ground  of  their  number  of  States,  on 
the  ground  of  wealth,  on  the  ground  of  probable  business, — as  depend- 
ing on  any  of  those  circumstances, — or  on  the  ground  of  their  diversi- 
ties of  local  law,  which  last  the  chairman  more  particularly  and  elo- 
quently urged  as  a  reason  for  three  new  judges  from  the  valley  of  the 
Mississippi. 

Some  of  these  considerations  have  been  suggested  by  some  persons, 
and  others  by  other  persons ;  but  they  all  are  resolvable  into  a  kind 
of  representation. 

For  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  the  relative  condition  of  the  west 
on  this  point,  I  cast  away  every  shield  and  panoply  as  to  the  princi- 
ple, and  concede  to  the  advocates  of  the  bill  that  this  representation, 
based  on  any  of  those  circumstances,  is  neither  novel  nor  abominable. 

A  very  easy  and  just  test  of  their  equality,  so  far  as  regards  popu- 
lation (and  almost  everything  connected  with  the  judiciary  depends 
on  population,  directly  or  indirectly),  is  the  representation  in  Con- 
gress. Examine  this  a  single  moment.  All  the  States  have  two 
hundred  and  thirteen  representatives;  and  the  present  number  of 
judges  who  compose  the  Supreme  Court  being  seven,  the  judicial 
representation  is  only  one  judge  to  every  thirty  representatives.  The 
nine  States  included  in  this  bill  have  one  judge,  reckoning  the  recent 
vacancy  in  that  quarter  as  filled,  and  only  forty-seven  representatives. 
Hence,  on  this  ground,  they  are  not  yet  entitled  to  one  more  judge ; 
and  much  less  are  they  entitled  to  three  more,  until  they  have  one 
hundred  and  twenty  representatives.  The  result  is  the  same,  if  you 
consider  separately  the  six  new  States  now  destitute  of  any  circuit  or 
supreme  judges ;  for  they  all  have  only  twelve  representatives,  and, 
of  course,  are  not  yet,  on  this  ground,  entitled  to  a  single  judge,  while 
the  other  three,  having  only  thirty-five  representatives,  are  now,  on 
the  same  hypothesis,  fully  represented.  The  great  increase  of  judges, 
therefore,  contemplated  by  this  bill,  so  far  from  being  necessary  and 
equal  towards  the  west,  on  this  ground  of  judicial  representation,  is 
grossly  partial,  unequal,  and  unjust. 

There  is  no  escape  from  this  conclusion,  by  saying  that  the  new 
judges  may,  or  should,  be  selected  from  other  States  than  those 
embraced  in  the  bill ;  for  that  would  be  an  abandonment  of  either 
the  principle  of  representation  on  every  ground,  or  of  the  very  fact  of 
that  want  of  an  equality,  which  is  now  under  examination.  Nor  is 
there  any  escape  by  saying  that  these  nine  States  have  increased  much 
in  population  since  the  last  census ;  because  the  other  States  have 
likewise  increased,  and  though  in  a  ratio  not  probably  equal,  yet  more 
equal  than  heretofore,  and  sufficient  to  prevent  my  former  conclusion 


46  JUDICTAKY   OF   THE  UNITED   STATES. 

from  being  shaken.  It  was  admitted,  on  Friday  last,  by  the  gentle- 
man from  Kentucky  (Mr.  Rowan),  that  two  or  three  of  the  oldest 
of  these  nine  States  had  now  become  emigrating  States ;  and  all  of  us 
know  that  the  tide  of  emigration  into  them  from  the  East  no  longer 
dashes  over  the  Alleghanies  as  it  once  did.  The  swarms  from  the 
northern  hive  now  alight  nearer  home.  Even  in  cities  like  New 
York  and  Boston,  and  in  many  towns  somewhat  rural,  like  Dover  and 
Chelmsford,  manufactures,  no  less  than  an  improved  agriculture,  and 
commerce,  always  vigilant,  have  worked  their  miracles ;  and  as  rapid 
an  increase  within  the  last  seven  years  can  be  shown  as  in  any  vale 
of  the  land  of  promise  in  the  west. 

But  if  the  population  of  those  nine  States  had,  since  the  last  cen- 
sus, augmented  one-half,  and  all  the  other  States  had  remained  sta- 
tionary, it  would  justify,  on  this  hypothesis  of  judicial  representation, 
an  addition  of  only  one  judge  ;  and  when  these  nine  States  are  com- 
pared with  those  north-east  of  Maryland,  it  would  not  justify  the  addi- 
tion of  even  one.  Those  north-eastern  States  have  now  one  hundred 
and  seventeen  representatives,  and  only  two  judges  of  the  Supreme 
Court.  Add  to  the  nine  western  States  twenty-three  more  repre- 
sentatives for  an  increased  population,  and  then,  with  seventy  repre- 
sentatives and  one  judge,  they  are  not  entitled,  to  even  a  single  judge 
more  till  they  have  one  hundred  and  seventeen  representatives.  The 
present  bill,  therefore,  allowing  four  judges  where  a  right  exists  to 
only  one,  and  leaving  only  two  judges  in  States  where  a  right  exists 
to  four,  proceeds  on  a  new  kind  of  equality  as  regards  population, — 
proceeds  on  a  boasted  species  of  legislation  on  broad  national  views 
which  it  has  been  my  misfortune  not  to  comprehend. 

But  it  has  been  suggested  by  another  member  of  the  judiciary 
committee, — the  ingenious  gentleman  from  Maine, — that  this  great 
increase  of  judges  in  that  region  is  to  favor  or  represent  the  small 
States.  If  judges  are  to  be  created  in  analogy  to  the  representation 
in  the  Senate  rather  than  the  House  of  Representatives,  then  the  bill 
should  provide  at  least  one  judge  for  each  State ;  or,  if  they  are  to  be 
created  to  represent  State  codes  of  local  law,  the  same  necessity  exists 
for  a  judge  from  each  State.  But  this  bill  neither  confers  an  equal 
favor  in  this  respect  on  each  State,  nor  on  each  class  of  States.  If  a 
class  of  small  States  are  to  have  judges  to  aid  them  merely  as  small 
States, — if  the  bill  is  an  oblation  or  peace-offering  to  them, — then  why 
does  that  gentleman  forget  the  East? — forget  our  own  hearths  and 
altars,  and  the  resting-place  of  our  fathers'  ashes  ? 

Are  Maine,  New  Hampshire,  Vermont,  Rhode  Island,  Connecticut, 
New  Jersey,  and  Delaware,  less  deserving  than  the  younger  members 
of  the  family  ?  And,  if  the  small  States  are  to  be  aided  by  any 
measure,  are  those  at  the  east,  who  are  now  destitute  of  any  judge 
of  the  Supreme  Court,  to  be  entirely  overlooked  ?  A  most  striking 
fact  on  this  point  is,  that  the  present  eastern  circuit,,  composed  of 
small  States,  save  Massachusetts,  has  only  one  judge  to  twenty-seven 


JUDICIARY   OF  THE  UNITED   STATES.  47 

representatives,  when  this  bill  gives  to  the  small  States,  in  the  west 
and  south-west,  one  judge  in  one  circuit  to  only  four  representatives, 
and  in  another  circuit  to  only  five.  A  less  number,  in  the  whole  of 
each  of  those  circuits,  than  what  belongs  to  the  little  Spartan  State 
alone,  one  of  whose  sentinels, — unworthy,  to  be  sure, — I  am,  stationed 
in  this  citadel.  Again:  if  the  judicial  representation,  in  order  to 
justify  this  increase  of  judges,  is  to  be  grounded,  not  on  States,  nor 
on  "men,  high-minded  men, 

Who  know  their  rights, 

And,  knowing,  dare  maintain," 

then  it  must  be  grounded  on  wealth  or  territory.  But  this  part  of 
the  inquiry  has  been  sufficiently  extended,  and,  if  pursued  further, 
may  give  rise  to  invidious  feelings,  which  I,  on  my  part,  utterly  dis- 
claim. I  prize  no  less  highly  than  others  the  services  and  the  chiv- 
alry of  the  west ;  and  can  see,  without  envy,  in  the  mist  of  coming 
time,  their  high  destinies.  But,  if  you  look  to  the  arts  that  sustain 
or  embellish  Hfe,  to  private  affluence  or  public  institutions,  to  single 
cities,  or  the  numbers,  capital,  and  power  of  States,  the  region  of 
country  embraced  by  this  bill  will,  surely,  at  this  period  of  their 
unrivalled  growth,  complain  of  no  existing  injustice  towards  them  in 
judicial  representation,  as  based  on  wealth.  Yet,  as  respects  terri- 
tory,— if  that,  independent  of  its  population,  wealth,  and  other  circum- 
stances, is  to  be  the  basis,  I  frankly  concede  that  their  present  num- 
ber of  judges  is  unequal;  though,  at  the  same  time,  a  larger  number, 
on  this  hypothesis,  must  not  be  created  to  represent  or  benefit  men  or 
wealth,  the  causes  of  contracts,  torts,  and  courts ;  but,  in  some  sec- 
tions, mere  earth  and  vegetation,  without  any  controversy  to  be 
settled,  unless  that  of  older  time  between  the  trees  and  the  bramble. 

I  know  that  the  friends  of  the  bill  cannot  desire  this  increase  of 
judges  on  the  last  ground  exclusively ;  while  I  do  not  hesitate  to  con- 
fess, that,  in  connection  with  the  others,  it  is  not  to  be  lost  sight  of  in 
the  frame  and  establishment  of  any  judicial  system.  I  have  now  done, 
sir,  with  the  consideration  of  a  supposed  want  of  equality,  or  due  bal- 
ance of  power,  in  the  west  and  south-west,  on  the  bench  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  as  founded  upon  any  principle  of  representation, 
whether  called  representation  or  by  some  other  name,  imagined  to  be 
less  exceptionable  in  respect  to  a  judiciary;  a  principle  on  whose 
abstract  correctness  I  say  nothing,  but  whose  operation  I  have  exam- 
ined, merely  because  it  has  been  urged  by  others,  in  different  shapes 
and  under  different  titles,  as  a  plausible,  and,  indeed,  unanswerable 
argument  in  favor  of  the  proposed  increase  of  the  Supreme  Court. 

Another  ground  for  this  increase,  and  what  was  styled,  by  the 
chairman  of  the  Judicial  Committee,  "a  leading  grievance,"  is  a  sup- 
posed want  of  equality  between  the  judicial  system  now  in  operation  in 
those  nine  States  and  that  in  operation  elsewhere.     To  understand  the 


48  JUDICIARY   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

extent  of  this  grievance,  it  will  be  indispensable  to  advert  a  moment  to 
their  present  system.  It  consists  of  a  Circuit  Court  in  the  three  older 
and  more  populous  States ;  and  in  the  other  new  and  thinly-settled 
States,  a  court  by  a  district  judge  with  circuit  powers,  and  a  right 
in  all  to  revise  certain  questions  of  law  in  the  Supreme  Court.  What 
is  this  but  the  same  system  which  has  ever  prevailed  in  similar  regions 
of  country,  since  the  organization  of  our  government  1  Indeed,  as  a 
system,  this  can  be  complained  of  only  in  the  six  newest  States ;  and  in 
them  the  only  inherent  defect  of  the  system  is  supposed  to  be  the  want 
of  a  judge  of  the  Supreme  Court  to  attend  the  circuit,  because  their 
District  Courts  are  now  held  as  others  throughout  the  Union,  and  their 
appeals,  or  writs  of  error,  to  the  Supreme  Court,  in  all  cases,  are,  or 
might  be,  made  the  same  in  substance  as  elsewhere,  without  any  change 
of  the  system  itself. 

A  moment's  attention  to  our  judicial  history  may  correct  some 
hasty  impressions  on  this  point.  The  very  first  judicial  act,  of  Septem- 
ber, A.  D.  1789,  included  within  its  established  circuits  neither  Maine 
nor  Kentucky.  But  did  any  person  ever  suppose  that  our  fathers 
thus  intended  to  put  their  inhabitants  to  the  ban  of  the  empire  1  to 
exclude  them  from  the  pale  of  our  judiciary  ?  or  to  strip  them  of  their 
proportionate  privileges  1 

So  far  from  it,  that  a  district  judge  with  circuit  powers  was  then 
created  for  them  as  a  part  of  our  local  judicial  system  best  adapted  to 
tracts  of  country  newly  and  thinly  settled ;  and  in  similar  regions  this 
has  constantly  been  retained  as  the  appropriate  system,  and,  indeed,  as 
the  only  one  that  can  be  applied  in  such  places,  without  giving  to  them 
more  judges,  and  a  greater  judicial  expenditure,  than  they  are  entitled 
to  on  any  of  those  principles  of  equality  so  strongly  urged  by  the  friends 
of  this  bill  as  the  basis  of  all  our  institutions.  Let  me  entreat  the 
Senate  to  reflect  a  moment  longer  on  this  consideration.  Because,  if 
we  trace  down  our  judicial  history,  it  will  be  seen  that  this  part  of  our 
system,  now  the  cause  of  so  severe  complaint,  was  afterwards  intro- 
duced into  all  other  places,  beside  Maine  and  Kentucky,  where  the 
population  and  territory  were  similar,  and  retained  not  only  during 
their  district  and  territorial  condition,  but,  in  many  of  them,  long  after 
they  became  sovereign  and  independent  States. 

What  is  still  more  striking,  three  of  the  largest  States  in  the  Union, 
in  those  portions  of  them  in  a  physical  condition  similar  to  the  six  new 
States  in  this  bill,  have  resorted  to  this  very  district  system ;  and  have 
thus,  according  to  the  views  of  some,  subjected  large  portions  of  their 
population  to  ignominy,  and  placed  in  unequal  jeopardy  their  property, 
their  liberties,  and  their  lives. 

To  see  how  far  this  "leading  grievance,"  as  it  has  been  called,  can 
justify  tins  great  increase  of  judges,  I  do  not  shun  a  more  particular 
scrutiny,  because  I  am  seeking  truth,  and  not  victory.  If  it  be  such 
a  grievance,  it  is  on  the  ground  that  the  system  is  unlike  the  systems 
which  have  existed  in  similar  regions,  or  unlike  the  systems-  which 


JUDICIARY   OF   THE   UNITED    STATES.  49 

have  existed  in  similar  sovereign  States,  or  unlike  the  systems  else- 
where, in  its  inherent  excellence. 

But  it  is  not  such  a  grievance  on  the  first  ground ;  because  we  all 
know,  by  the  highest  written  evidence,  that  the  system  now  in  force  in 
these  six  States  has  always  prevailed  in  other  parts  of  the  Union 
similar  to  those  six  States  in  population  and  territory  ;  that  it  prevailed 
in  Maine  over  thirty  years,  in  Kentucky  eighteen  years,  in  Ten- 
nessee more  than  twelve  years ;  and,  without  further  detail,  has,  for 
some  years  past,  prevailed  in  large  sections  of  New  York,  Pennsyl- 
vania, and  Virginia.  Nor  is  it  such  a  grievance  on  the  second  ground. 
For,  whether  that  ground  be  assumed  on  the  theory  of  the  able  chair- 
man of  the  Judiciary  Committee,  that  a  Circuit  Court,  and  judges  of 
the  Supreme  Court,  are  due  to  those  six  States  on  account  of  State 
pride,  —  or,  as  suggested  by  others,  are  due  as  a  badge  of  State 
sovereignty,  State  uniformity,  or  some  other  indescribable  State  pre- 
rogative, —  then  will  our  past  history  be  found  at  war  with  this  theory. 
Because  this  precise  system,  saying  nothing  of  these  six  new  States, 
long  pervaded  other  entire  independent  States,  as  lofty  in  their  politi- 
cal opinions  as  the  loftiest. 

It  was  the  system  of  the  gallant  Tennessee,  as  a  State,  from  A.  D. 
1796  to  A.  D.  1807 ;  of  the  giant  Ohio,  from  her  State  birth  till  the 
same  era;  and  even  of  Kentucky,  with  all  her  chivalry  and  eagle  vigi- 
lance, from  her  admission  into  the  Union,  in  A.  D.  1793,  till,  after 
fourteen  years,  she  and  her  immediate  neighbors  had  attained  to  that 
population  which  might,  on  equal  principles,  justify  their  receipt  of 
more  judges  and  more  expenditure,  and  which  might  render  the  cir- 
cuit system  not  altogether  inappropriate  to  their  increased  density  of 
population,  —  a  density  of  population,  however,  which,  though  then 
perhaps  too  small  for  the  system,  and  an  extension  of  it,  by  altering 
the  numbers  of  the  Supreme  Court,  not  the  most  eligible  remedy,  yet 
holding  out  no  justification  to  this  bill,  because  those  three  States  then 
averaged  to  the  square  mile  nearly  a  third  more  population  than  these 
six  States  now  do. 

When  I  speak  of  the  present  circuit  system,  with  its  present  details, 
as  undesigned  and  unfitted  for  so  sparse  a  population,  I  can  furnish 
no  stronger  illustration  of  the  correctness  of  my  ideas  than  the  fact 
that  a  judge  cannot  possibly  attend  the  Supreme  Court  here  long 
enough  to  discharge,  with  promptitude  and  fidelity,  all  the  business 
here,  and  then  travel,  twice  a  year,  over  a  circuit  embracing  a  proper 
number  of  people,  in  a  country  thinly  populated,  without  becoming  a 
mere  courier  or  Cossack.  Hence,  this  very  bill  exhibits  the  strange 
anomaly  of  an  attempt  to  extend  this  system  on  what  is  called  equal 
principles,  and  yet  giving  to  a  population  in  the  most  eastern  circuit, 
large  enough  to  have  twenty-seven  representatives  in  Congress,  only 
one  circuit  and  one  judge,  and  giving  the  tenth  circuit  and  one  judge 
to  a  population  only  large  enough  to  have  four  representatives.  What 
is  still  more  decisive,  giving  to  New  York,  Connecticut  and  Vermont, 
5 


50  JUDICIARY   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

with  forty-five  representatives,  only  one  circuit  and  one  judge,  and  to 
Indiana,  Illinois  and  Missouri,  with  only  five  representatives,  one 
circuit  also  and  one  judge  !  How  striking  the  unfitness  of  a  system 
which  assigns  to  one  judge  the  business  of  a  population  of  about  two 
hundred  thousand,  and  to  another  the  business  of  about  two  millions  ! 

When  admitted  into  the  great  family  of  the  Union,  it  was  not  con- 
sidered by  the  three  oldest  States  in  this  bill,  or  by  the  other  six 
States,  that  the  want  of  a  circuit  and  a  judge  of  the  Supreme  Court 
was  derogatory  to  their  independence  or  humiliating  to  their  dignity ; 
else,  then,  if  ever,  would  and  should  the  tocsin  of  remonstrance  have 
been  blown  long  and  loud ;  because  then,  if  ever,  on  this  ground  of 
State  pride,  did  their  honor  and  their  rights  require  complaint ;  then, 
if  ever,  on  this  ground,  was  it  a  grievance  and  an  ignominy. 

No,  sir.  The  truth  then  lay,  as  it  now  lies,  deep  in  their  physical 
condition,  and  in  the  nature  of  the  circuit  system.  I  would  be  one  of 
the  last  to  wound  their  just  pride,  or  to  withhold  from  them,  in  a 
measure  otherwise  safe  and  judicious,  any  proportionate  right ;  but  it 
was  always  justly  supposed  that  the  primary  duties  of  the  Supreme 
Court  consisted  in  the  discharge  of  its  great  appellate  jurisdiction 
here ;  and  that  the  local  duties  of  the  judiciary  were  subordinate  to 
those,  and  to  be  performed  by  local  judges,  aided  by  the  Supreme 
Court  only  as  much  as  might  be  practicable,  without  any  neglect  or 
sacrifice  of  their  higher  duties  here.  Hence,  the  judges  of  the 
Supreme  Court  were  not  then  required  to  go  to  the  extremes  of  Maine 
and  Kentucky  to  discharge  local  duties ;  hence,  they  have  not  since 
been  sent  into  other  Territories  or  new  States,  which  might  call  them 
away  too  distant  and  too  long  for  the  proper  despatch  of  the  business 
of  paramount  consequence  in  the  Supreme  Court  itself.  Hence,  we 
should  not  now,  to  remove  any  local  grievance,  make  a  hazardous 
inroad  on  the  numbers,  character  and  security,  of  that  august  tribunal, 
which  is  the  palladium  of  all  the  States,  which  is  consecrated  by  the 
constitution,  and  all  the  best  theories  of  free  government,  and  in 
whose  supervisory  duties  all  now  enjoy  an  equal  share,  and  for  the 
blushing  honors  of  whose  bench  all  now  stand  in  equal  competition. 

The  only  remaining  ground  of  complaint,  concerning  the  system  in 
these  six  new  States,  is,  that  it  is  not  in  itself  so  excellent  as  the 
system  which  prevails  in  the  other  States.  But  if  it  be  as  similar  and 
as  good  as  their  physical  condition,  the  proportionate  rights  of  all,  and 
the  legitimate  application  of  the  circuit  system,  will  permit,  though  not 
perhaps  the  best  in  the  abstract,  or  not  the  best  for  other  conditions  of 
society,  then  the  bill  is  on  this  point  likewise  unsupported. 

That  it  is  thus  similar  and  good,  we  have  already  attempted  to 
show.  Without  a  repetition  of  former  remarks,  may  I  be  permitted  to 
suggest  one  or  two  additional  considerations  concerning  this  position  ? 

Let  gentlemen  advert  to  the  judicial  establishments  in  their 
respective  States,  and  tell  me,  where  they  possess  counties  new  and 
thinly  settled,  whether  the  terms  and  structure  of  their  courts  are  not 


JUDICIARY   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  51 

in  these  counties  somewhat  different  ?  —  not  subjecting  their  own 
Supreme  Courts  to  fluctuation  and  innovation,  to  make  the  system 
identical  in  every  county,  but  adapting  their  local  system  in  some 
degree  to  the  physical  condition  of  the  people.  I  beseech  the  House, 
also,  not  to  take  for  granted  that,  under  such  a  modified  system,  there 
is  in  the  system  itself  any  obstacle  to  as  good  and  as  equal  an  admin- 
istration of  justice  as  the  structure  of  human  society  and  the  relative 
rights  of  each  portion  will  permit.  The  questions  of  fact  are  all  set- 
tled, by  similar  juries ;  and  the  questions  of  law,  though  decided  in  the 
first  instance  by  judges  inferior  in  rank  or  number,  are,  or  may  be,  car- 
ried, by  appeal  or  writ  of  error,  to  the  same  higher  tribunal  winch  acts 
for  the  whole.  There  is  a  difference,  I  admit ;  but  it  is  only  a  differ- 
ence between  the  correctness  of  the  district  judge, — who  is  selected,  on 
the  favorite  theory  of  gentlemen,  from  his  own  district,  with  all  the  lex 
loci  and  lex  non  scripta  of  his  region  of  country,  — and  the  correctness 
of  the  circuit  judge;  and  which  difference,  in  all  cases  of  any  magnitude, 
can  be  corrected  by  some  additional  expense  and  cost  in  appeals  or 
writs  of  error. 

I  concede  that  this  additional  expense  and  cost,  though  in  a  few  cases 
only,  is  still  to  be  avoided,  if  it  can  be  avoided  on  any  equal  principles, 
and  without  danger  to  the  great  and  general  tribunals  which  dispense 
justice  to  the  whole.  But  surely  no  person  can  be  so  unreasonable  as 
to  ask  its  removal  in  such  a  manner  as  to  put  those  tribunals  in  jeop- 
ardy, and  to  incur  disproportionate  expense  to  the  whole  Union,  to  remedy 
inconveniences  which  all  small  populations  on  new  and  large  territories 
have  always  been  accustomed  to  endure. 

The  argument  might  be  urged,  with  much  greater  strength,  to  the 
removal  of  every  other  inconvenience  arising  from  the  physical  condi- 
tion of  any  part  of  our  country,  —  as  the  fewness  of  mechanics,  bad- 
ness of  roads,  small  number  of  schools,  and  distance  from  markets,  — 
because  these  would  only  require  a  disproportionate  share  of  our  joint 
funds,  without,  perhaps,  putting  at  hazard  any  of  our  important  insti- 
tutions, like  that  of  the  Supreme  Court. 

So,  as  a  mere  badge  of  State  uniformity  or  State  pride,  it  might 
more  safely  and  forcibly  be  argued  that  as  many  light-houses  and 
custom-house  officers  should  be  provided  for  each  State,  without  regard 
to  its  commerce ;  and,  as  respects  the  wisdom  of  the  bill,  on  the  ground 
of  mere  equality  in  system,  what  planter,  with  two  hundred  acres  of 
land  and  ten  workmen,  would  insist  upon  only  using  the  spade  system 
of  husbandry,  because  in  and  of  itself  most  excellent,  and  because  that 
system  had  been  found  appropriate  where  a  planter  with  two  hundred 
acres  of  land  had  one  hundred  workmen  1 

All  legislation  is  only  an  approximation  to  the  theories  of  abstract 
right  and  equality.  It  must  be  modified  by  an  infinite  number  of  cir- 
cumstances. Every  wise  man,  in  common  life,  acts  invariably  accord- 
ing to  the  diversity  of  means,  interests  and  condition  of  himself  and 


52  JUDICIARY    OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

those  around  him,  and  any  different  system  of  equality  in  legislation 
is  only  the  levelling,  indiscriminate  equality  of  a  church-yard. 

But  if  such  an  equality  is  to  be  pushed,  at  every  sacrifice  and  danger, 
in  respect  to  a  judicial  system,  this  bill  is  a  perfect  felo-de-se,  on  that 
hypothesis ;  because,  as  before  shown,  it  violates  such  an  equality  in 
judicial  representation  as  much  as  it  enforces  such  an  equality  in 
system.  Nor  is  it  any  answer  to  this  view  of  the  subject,  that  the 
executive  may  select  the  new  judges  from  the  north  and  east,  when, 
in  the  same  breath,  gentlemen  argue  that  they  are  wanted  on  account 
of  their  knowledge  of  local  law  in  the  west ;  when  by  the  bill  they  are 
compelled  to  reside  in  the  west ;  when  all  their  local  duties  are  to  be 
performed  there,  and  when  we  witness  around  us  such  splendid  speci- 
mens of  western  and  south-western  talent,  that  must  be  overlooked  in 
order  to  import  into  the  rich  valley  of  the  Mississippi,  from  some 
eastern  manufactory,  a  cargo  of  foreign  judges. 

Again:  if  this  system  is  to  be  extended  to  the  six  new  States, 
because  most  excellent,  without  regard  to  the  effect  of  such  an  exten- 
sion on  the  Supreme  Court  itself,  and  without  regard  to  population  or 
expense,  then  why  not  extend  it  to  every  part  of  the  Union  now  des- 
titute of  it?  When  gentlemen  talk  of  equality  and  broad  American 
grounds,  —  when  they,  with  indignation  and  justice,  disdain  sectional 
views  and  favoritism, — why  create  new  circuits  for  the  people  in  these 
new  States,  and  not  at  the  same  time  create  them  for  more  than  three 
times  as  many  people,  now  destitute  of  such  circuits,  in  western  New 
York,  Pennsylvania  and  Virginia?  Is  not  this  straining  at  a  gnat, 
and  swallowing  a  camel  ?  For,  if  the  circuit  system  of  itself  be  superior, 
and  therefore,  without  regard  to  other  circumstances,  is  to  be  extended 
to  the  west  and  south-west,  for  the  safety  and  advantage  of  about  half 
a  million  of  people  now  destitute,  then  surely  a  million  and  a  half  of 
people  in  the  three  great  Atlantic  States  are  equally  entitled  to  its 
securities  and  blessings.  Are  not  the  lives  and  liberties  of  any  of  the 
constituents  of  the  chairman  as  much  endangered  now,  by  a  trial  before 
one  judge,  as  he  feelingly  described  those  of  the  people  of  Illinois  to 
be  ?  Is  not  this  as  cogent  a  reason  for  a  change,  a  speedy  and  radical 
change,  in  Pennsylvania  as  in  Alabama  ?  And  though  the  honorable 
chairman  might  recollect  that  life  is  constantly  tried  in  England  before 
one  judge,  whose  system  has  been  so  much  eulogized,  and  also  that  it 
can  be  so  tried,  under  our  present  system,  in  any  part  of  the  Union,  in 
the  absence  of  the  circuit  judge,  — and  that  the  jury  in  such  trials,  pass- 
ing on  both  the  law  and  the  facts,  are  the  great  safeguard  of  the  citizen, 
— yet,  admitting  that  a  change  in  this  respect  is  indispensable,  it  should 
be  made  in  the  old  as  well  as  the  new  States ;  because,  reversing  his 
own  language,  can  it  be  questioned  that  life,  liberty  and  property,  are 
as  valuable  in  the  old  as  in  the  new  States  ?  It  is  no  answer  to  this 
reasoning,  that  Circuit  Courts  now  exist  in  some  parts  of  Pennsylvania 
or  Virginia ;  for  those  courts  no  more  secure  and  benefit  the  lives, 
liberties  and  property,  of  the  other  parts,  than  they  benefit  the  people 


JUDICIARY   OF  THE   UNITED   STATES.  53 

of  Missouri.  So,  if  other  modes  of  relief  can  be  suggested  for  all  these 
old  States,  other  modes  can  also  be  suggested  for  all  the  new  States. 
So,  if  the  old  States  have  not  petitioned  for  relief  on  this  ground, 
neither  have  the  new  ones. 

Carry  the  argument  one  step  further.  Why  not,  on  this  ground, 
extend  the  circuits  to  the  Territories  1  Are  not  their  inhabitants  flesh 
of  our  flesh  ?  Are  they  not  Americans  ?  Are  not  their  properties, 
lives  and  liberties,  as  .valuable  to  them  —  to  use  again  the  words  of  the 
chairman  —  as  ours  are  to  us  ?  Have  they  not  men  as  competent  for 
judges  of  the  Supreme  Court,  when  one  of  them  is  now  spoken  of  as 
a  prominent  candidate  1  Shall  they  not  enjoy  equal  protection,  and  a 
judicial  system  of  equal  excellence?  Thus,  pursuing  an  abstract 
theory  to  all  its  legitimate  consequences,  its  fallacy,  when  applied 
without  any  regard  to  the  different  conditions,  rights  and  duties,  of  all, 
becomes  most  manifest. 

One  more  ground  was  mentioned,  by  the  chairman,  as  a  justification 
for  this  increase  of  the  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court,  which,  since  the 
debate  on  Friday  last,  as  to  the  union  of  Ohio  and  Kentucky  in  one 
circuit,  will  probably  not  be  much  relied  on. 

It  was  that  these  judges  were  wanted  on  account  of  the  peculiar  and 
extraordinary  mass  of  judicial  business  in  the  west  and  south-west. 
If  this  mass  of  business  in  fact  existed,  it  might  be  answered  that  we 
have,  as  already  shown,  devoted  an  equal  and  proportionate  number 
of  judges  and  judicial  expenditure  to  its  discharge.  But,  as  I  am  one 
of  the  last  persons  to  withhold  relief  where  actual  grievances  exist,  or 
to  begrudge  to  any  quarter  of  the  Confederacy  any  expense,  any  num- 
ber of  judges,  or  any  kind  of  system,  safe  to  the  whole  Confederacy, 
and  necessary  to  perform  the  business  properly  and  permanently 
devolving  on  our  courts,  I  will  detain  the  House  a  moment  to  ascer- 
tain how  the  truth  is  as  to  this  supposed  mass  of  business,  and  to 
ascertain  how  necessary  and  safe  for  its  discharge  may  be  this  proposed 
increase  of  judges  on  the  bench  of  the  Supreme  Court.  Here  I  con- 
fide implicitly  in  the  local  knowledge  of  gentlemen  from  those  nine 
States,  as  to  the  character  and  amount  of  the  business.  I  will  stand 
on  the  utmost  verge  of  courtesy,  and  take  the  highest  estimate  of  one 
of  the  warmest  friends  of  the  bill. 

That  estimate  gives  to  Louisiana  and  Illinois  eighty  actions  each 
per  year ;  to  Alabama,  sixty ;  to  Indiana  and  Mississippi,  forty  each ; 
and  to  Missouri,  thirty.  These  are  the  six  States  without  the  circuit 
system,  and  will  first  be  considered.  The  largest  of  them,  on  the 
highest  supposition,  brings  but  eighty  actions  a  year  into  our  courts ; 
and  this,  at  the  liberal  portion  of  one-third  for  trial,  which  is  as  many 
as  the  chairman  himself  supposed,  last  Friday,  in  the  other  States, 
would  leave  on  the  most  crowded  dockets  nearly  two  weeks  for  each 
trial.  If  this  be  an  extraordinary  mass  of  business,  it  surely  is  an 
extraordinary  small  mass  for  any  one  court  in  any  section  of  the 
Union;  and  so  far  from  rendering  necessary  more  judges  to  des- 
5* 


54  JUDICIARY   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

patch  it,  would  hardly  keep  the  mould  and  cobwebs  from  gathering 
over  the  present  judges.  As  regards,  then,  the  whole  six  States,  all 
who  have  not  now  a  circuit,  and  the  attendance  of  a  judge  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  the  increase  of  judges,  on  account  of  the  mass  of  busi- 
ness, is  entirely  useless.  The  bill,  as  respects  them,  on  this  account, 
rests  upon  sand. 

Mark,  then,  sir,  the  conclusion  as  to  the  other  three  States.  Though 
they  now  have  a  circuit,  and  the  attendance  of  a  judge  of  the  Supreme 
Court,  yet  we  are  to  create  three  more  circuits  and  three  more  judges, 
on  account  of  a  mass  of  business,  which,  if  it  exist  at  all,  must  exist  in 
those  three  States  alone. 

Again:  we  are  to  create  some  of  these  circuits  and  judges  in 
Alabama  or  Missouri,  for  example,  when  the  business  itself  exists  only 
in  Kentucky,  Ohio  and  Tennessee.  Or,  to  show  distinctly  the  charac- 
ter of  the  bill  on  this  hypothesis,  we  are,  on  account  of  a  pressure  of 
business  solely  in  the  present  seventh  circuit,  to  create  three  new 
judges  and  new  circuits,  and  yet,  by  this  very  bill,  not  assign  to  the 
States  within  that  circuit  the  whole  labors  of  one  additional  judge.  I 
appeal  to  the  bill  itself,  on  this  point,  as  conclusive.  Ohio  and  Ken- 
tucky now  form  one  circuit,  and  one  additional  judge  is  to  do  the  busi- 
ness, not  only  of  Tennessee,  but  Alabama.  It  was  settled  here,  no 
longer  since  than  last  Friday,  and  by  almost  an  unanimous  vote,  and 
on  the  statements  of  the  very  friends  of  the  bill,  that  no  pressure  of 
business  existed  there  which  required  any  more  additional  labor. 

The  business,  though  nominally  large,  was  said  to  be  of  such  a 
character  that  the  decision  of  one  cause  frequently  governed  the  dispo- 
sition of  fifty  more.  Much  of  the  accumulation  on  the  dockets  had, 
in  some  of  the  States,  arisen  from  transient  causes, — such  as  the  ill- 
ness of  a  judge,  the  sudden  operation  of  some  statute  of  limitation,  the 
enactment  of  some  relief  system,  the  difficulties  between  rival  courts, 
the  suits  growing  out  of  the  United  States  Bank  controversy,  and 
various  other  causes,  which  need  not  be  enumerated,  and  on  the 
merits  of  which  I  offer  no  opinion  whatever, — but  all  of  which  estab- 
lished, beyond  doubt,  that  the  accumulation  of  business  was  temporary, 
and  that  their  dockets  would  soon  diminish  to  one  or  two  hundred  cases 
each. 

The  western  gentlemen  also  admitted,  with  their  usual  frankness, 
and  manliness,  that  most  of  this  business  was  that  where  our  courts 
have  concurrent,  and  not  exclusive  jurisdiction ;  where  suitors  might 
enter  the  State  courts  with  it,  but  prefer  the  United  States  courts. 

Reasoning  a  priori,  every  lawyer  would  have  arrived  at  the  same 
conclusion ;  because  the  business  of  exclusive  jurisdiction,  such  as  relates 
to  custom-house  bonds,  salvage,  seizures  for  breaches  of  the  revenue 
laws,  libels  for  seamen's  wages,  &c,  must,  on  account  of  our  com- 
merce, exist  in  a  greater  proportion  on  the  eastern  than  the  western 
side  of  the  Alleghanies.  And  yet,  the  courts  of  the  former  seldom 
exhibit  a  docket  of  more  than  one  or  two  hundred  actions. 


JUDICIARY   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  55 

The  cases  of  concurrent  jurisdiction,  though  less  numerous  in  the 
extreme  east  than  in  the  west,  are  still  frequent,  on  account  of  disputes 
as  to  land  owned  by  non-residents,  and  on  account  of  numerous  debts 
due  to  the  non-resident  merchant-kings  of  the  New  England  metropolis. 
But  almost  every  action  of  this  kind  there  enters  the  State  courts. 
It  will  doubtless  enter  the  State  courts  in  the  west  more  frequently  as 
their  institutions  grow  older ;  and  it  could  not  be  asked,  without  an  ill 
grace,  that  we  should  make  great  and  permanent  changes  in  our  judi- 
ciary to  transact  a  description  of  business  not  wisely  confided  to  it  in  the 
first  instance, —  as  most  forcibly  shown  by  the  chairman  of  that  com- 
mittee,— not  in  analogy  to  the  correlative  powers  of  the  other  depart- 
ments of  our  general  government,  and  not  connected  with  those  mari- 
time questions,  those  disputes  between  States,  those  controversies  under 
the  acts  of  Congress,  those  difficulties  in  respect  to  the  agents  of  for- 
eign nations,  and  those  supervisory  powers  over  constitutional  construc- 
tions, which  would  seem  to  form  the  only  legitimate  employment  of  a 
federal  judiciary. 

When  we  reflect  for  a  moment,  and  find,  also,  that  this  accumula- 
tion of  business  is  confined  to  only  two  or  three  States,  is  artificial  and 
transient  in  its  character,  and  that,  even  now,  the  plaintiffs,  who  are 
always  shrewd  enough  concerning  their  own  interests,  select  our  courts 
in  preference  to  the  State  courts,  for  business  which  they  might  prose- 
cute in  either,  we  surely  cannot  be  justified  in  still  greater  comity,  at 
a  large  increase  of  expense,  and  in  a  manner  producing  a  radical  and 
alarming  change  in  the  quorum,  members,  and  operations,  of  the 
Supreme  Court  itself.  I  forbear  to  dwell  longer  on  those  general 
grounds  which  have  at  different  times,  and  by  different  persons,  been 
adduced  for  this  great  increase  of  judges. 

After  a  consideration  of  them  with  that  care  and  impartiality  which 
the  importance  of  the  subject  demands,  will  any  person  avow  that  they 
exhibit  a  grievance  which  requires  for  its  removal  this  extraordinary 
remedy  ?  Whatever  may  be  the  disorder,  is  this  the  safest  specific  1 
A  few  other  circumstances  connected  with  this  proposed  remedy  must 
not  be  overlooked.  It  can  conduce  but  little  to  the  despatch  of  busi- 
ness in  the  seventh  circuit.  That  despatch,  after  all  which  has  or  can 
be  said,  is  probably  the  desideratum  there  now  the  most  urgent  and 
momentous.  But,  whether  the  business  be  concurrent  and  transient, 
or  otherwise, — be  it  better  performed  than  in  the  State  courts,  or  not, — 
be  the  call  for  this  bill  from  creditors  and  great  land-owners,  or  from  the 
debtor  and  hardy  pioneer,  who,  by  its  operation,  will  be  dragged  into 
courts  more  distant  and  expensive  than  their  own  tribunals, — yet  all 
its  new  circuits  and  judges  are  insufficient  materially  to  promote 
despatch,  without  a  division  of  some  of  the  western  districts.  Another 
bill  on  your  table,  reported  by  the  judiciary  committee,  to  establish 
another  district  in  Kentucky,  is,  on  this  point;,  perfect  demonstration. 
Every  lawyer  knows  that  the  creation  of  twenty  new  circuits  can  in  no 
degree  affect  the  district  docket;  and  it  can  only  indirectly  affect  the 


56  JUDICIABY   OF  THE   UNITED   STATES. 

circuit  docket,  because  even  now  the  Circuit  Court  at  each  term  can 
continue  any  desirable  length  of  time,  as  the  district  judge  can  hold  it 
after  the  necessary  departure  of  the  circuit  judge.  Without  dividing 
a  district,  then,  no  greater  despatch  is  obtained,  except  indirectly, 
unless  two  judges,  present  the  whole  term,  can  transact  more  business 
than  one  judge.     This  is  neither  true  in  theory  nor  practice, 

If  the  last  bill,  creating  a  new  district  and  new  district  judge  in 
Kentucky,  should  alone  pass,  and  that  judge  be  clothed  with  circuit 
powers,  it  seems  to  me  that  the  great  root  of  every  actual  grievance 
from  the  accumulation  -of  business  would  be  removed.  Nor  would  it 
seem  altogether  decorous  for  either  of  the  States  in  that  circuit  to 
insist  that  such  a  remedy  was  oppressive  or  mortifying,  to  taunt  such  a 
judge  with  the  title  of  Land  Commissioner,  and  brand  such  a  system 
as  derogatory  to  their  State  pride,  when  it  is  the  identical  system  now 
in  force  in  three  of  the  oldest  and  largest  members  of  the  Union,  and 
is  not  deemed  derogatory  to  the  pride  of  such  States  as  the  Ancient 
Dominion,  as  the  rich  inheritance  of  Penn,  and  as  what  may  be,  for 
aught  I  know,  both  the  Rome  and  Carthage  of  our  Confederacy. 

It  appears  to  me  to  have  been  an  error  of  opinion,  or  in  facts,  for 
the  chairman  of  the  committee,  in  the  history  of  our  various  judicial 
changes,  painted  by  him  in  such  glowing  colors,  to  suppose  that  some 
precedent  existed  for  this  great  increase  of  the  Supreme  Court.  The 
first  change  in  our  judiciary,  in  A.  D.  1793,  when  the  attendance  of 
two  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  twice  a  year,  in  each  of  the  then 
existing  circuits,  was  found  too  laborious,  lessened  their  circuit  duties, 
rather  than  increased  the  number  of  judges.  Nor  was  the  remedy 
adopted  in  A.  D.  1801  like  the  present  bill.  That,  he  himself  dis- 
claims, with  abhorrence.  Nor,  in  the  great  judicial  revolution  of  A. 
D.  1802,  was  the  number  of  judges  increased ;  and,  though  in  A.  D. 
1807  one  was  added  to  the  bench,  and,  as  I  think,  incautiously,  yet 
the  addition  did  not,  like  this,  either  alter  the  quorum  of  the  court,  or 
double  its  original  numbers ;  and  thus  did  not,  in  and  of  itself,  jeopard 
all  its  important  decisions,  and  lay  the  axe  at  the  root  of  all  its  boasted 
independence.  I  wish  to  be  distinctly  understood  on  this  point.  In 
A.  D.  1807,  the  old  quorum  was  four.  If  three  judges  agreed  in  a 
decision,  it  was  final ;  because,  if  one  of  the  four  dissented,  and  both  his 
absent  brethren  agreed  with  him  in  opinion,  they  were  not  a  majority, 
so  as  to  be  able  to  reverse  the  decision  in  any  like  case.  This  reversal 
could  happen  in  only  one  event,  after  the  addition  of  one  judge  in  A. 
D.  1807.  But  now,  if  four  of  the  new  quorum  agree  in  a  decision,  it 
has  a  double,  yea,  more  than  quadruple  chance  of  reversal ;  because, 
if  any  two  who  agreed  in  the  first  decision  be  absent,  and  their  places 
be  supplied  by  any  two  of  those  absent,  the  decision  can  be  overruled. 
This  great  addition,  also,  of  a  number  equal  to  a  majority  of  the  old 
quorum,  is  an  addition  of  just  enough  to  reverse  any  past  decision,  if 
in  ordinary  contingencies  only  a  quorum  attended,  and  the  appointing 
and  legislative  power  now  wished  to  reverse  the  principle  of  any  such 


JUDICIARY    OF   THE   UNITED    STATES.  57 

decision.  But  such  could  not  be  the  effect  or  tendency  of  the  addition 
in  A.  D.  180T.  Where,  then,  is  the  precedent?  And  how  danger- 
ous, and,  indeed,  fatal,  may  be  the  operation  of  the  present  increase, 
— of  the  present  contagious  example !  But  something  more  of  this 
hereafter. 

The  chairman  of  the  committee  undertook  to  vindicate  this  great 
increase  on  another  ground,  which  is  by  no  means  to  be  overlooked, — 
a  ground  connected  with  the  general  duties  of  the  Supreme  Court 
itself, — by  insisting  that  it  would  tend  to  remove  the  great  delay  which 
now  attends  their  administration  of  justice  in  the  apartment  below  us. 
Tins  would  be  an  object  worthy  of  some  great  and  general  change,  if 
it  could  not  otherwise  be  accomplished.  Dignus  vindice  nodus. 
Because  it  would  mitigate  or  remove  an  evil  not  sectional,  but  national, 
— an  evil  affecting  the  whole  twenty-four  States,  as  well  as  these  nine ; 
— affecting  the  Supreme  Court,  not  in  some  of  its  local  duties,  but  in 
the  exercise  of  its  high  original  and  appellate  powers, — powers  more 
peculiarly  devolved  on  it  by  the  constitution  than  any  circuit  ones, 
and  powers  of  infinitely  more  consequence  to  this  whole  Confederacy 
than  those  ever  before  devolved  upon  any  judicial  tribunal  in  the  annals 
of  history.  If  the  judges  are  not  allowed  leisure  for  these  duties,  the 
head  and  heart  of  the  system  are  palsied,  and  objects  only  secondary 
are  made  paramount  to  primary  ones. 

But,  notwithstanding  the  chairman  calls  the  delay  here  "a  great 
and  growing  evil,"  and  deserving  speedy  removal,  and  justifies  this 
bill,  as  tending  to  effect  that  object,  yet  a  little  consideration  must 
convince  every  person  that  his  expectations  are  delusive.  He  observed 
that  the  new  circuits  will  enable  the  judges  to  attend  here  earlier,  and 
thus  a  longer  session  can  be  held.  But  the  new  circuits  manifestly 
cannot  affect,  in  this  respect,  only  a  single  judge  of  the  present  court ; 
and  his  attendance  here  earlier  could  just  as  easily  be  caused  by  alter- 
ing the  session  in  his  circuit,  and  without  this  great  addition  to  the 
Supreme  Court,  as  with  this  addition.  Again :  the  earlier  session  of  a 
month  is  not  provided  for  in  this  bill,  but  in  another ;  and  the  passage 
of  that  bill  alone  will  produce  all  the  effect  which  this  earlier  session 
of  a  month  can  produce.  Indeed,  it  will  produce  more  effect  on  the 
delay,  without  the  present  bill,  than  with  it ;  because  the  chairman,  in 
another  part  of  his  remarks,  has  properly  argued  that  the  circuit  sys- 
tem in  the  six  new  States  will,  doubtless,  occasion  many  more  appeals 
to  the  Supreme  Court  than  are  now  taken,  on  account  of  the  division 
in  opinion  between  the  judges.  Thus,  of  course,  must  it  increase  the 
docket  of  the  Supreme  Court. 

Under  these  circumstances,  a  little  calculation  upon  admitted  facts 
must  show  the  total  ineflicacy  of  a  session  only  a  month  longer  in  the 
year  to  discharge  all  the  business  which  will  occupy  the  docket  of  the 
Supreme  Court  under  the  present  bill.  The  number  of  actions  on  that 
docket  has  lately  ranged  from  one  hundred  and  eighty  to  one  hundred 
and  ninety.     Only  from  forty  to  sixty  are  annually  disposed  of.     This, 


58  JUDICIARY   OE   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

in  the  present  sessions  of  about  six  weeks,  makes  the  inevitable  delay 
about  three  years. 

If  the  business  of  that  court  was  stationary,  an  addition  of  four 
weeks  to  the  term  would  not  remove  the  delay  under  four  or  five 
years.  But  if,  increasing  in  the  natural  increase  of  population,  wealth 
and  territory,  or  if  increased  by  only  three  causes  per  year,  from  each 
of  the  six  new  States,  by  means  of  the  change  of  system  as  before  men- 
tioned, more  than  the  whole  four  weeks  will  be  consumed  in  the  additional 
business ;  and  what  is  called  by  the  chairman,  even  now,  a  great  and 
growing  evil,  and  by  the  celebrated  memorial  of  the  Nashville  bar,  even 
now,  "a  great  delay,"  will  become,  by  this  increase  of  circuits  and 
judges,  a  still  greater  delay,  a  still  greater  evil.  "  A  great  delay," 
sir,  not  in  the  business  of  a  single  circuit,  like  the  seventh,  but  in  the 
business  of  the  whole  federation;  —  "a  great  delay,"  a  violation  of 
magna  charta,  not  in  litigations  of  subordinate  interest,  but  in  contro- 
versies large  enough  to  come  up  hither  from  the  extremes  of  the 
Union,  and  momentous  to  individual  rights,  or  controlling  in  their 
defined  orbits  States  otherwise  sovereign;  —  " a  great  delay,"  perad- 
venture,  at  times,  to  deform  the  moral  sublimity  of  one  of  the  grandest 
scenes  in  a  government  of  laws  and  not  of  men,  by  producing  the 
entire  ruin  of  some  humble  suitor, 

"  Some  village  Hampden,  who,  with  dauntless  breast, 
The  little  tyrant  of  his  fields  withstood," 

or  who,  in  a  just  reliance  on  his  contract  or  his  vested  rights,  has  dared 
to  hold  at  bay  not  merely  private  oppression,  or  the  mightiest  member 
of  our  Confederacy,  but  the  Confederacy  itself 

Again,  sir:  this  increase  of  judges  will,  on  another  principle,  tend  to 
inflame,  rather  than  lessen,  this  "  growing  evil."  Because,  on  the  true 
theory  of  a  single  judicial  body,  during  a  single  session,  it  will  not  be 
pretended  that  five  of  the  judges  can  examine  one  cause  while  the  other 
five  examine  another;  or  that  ten  can  hear  more  causes,  read  more  cases, 
or  be  oftener  convinced,  within  a  term,  than  seven  can.  On  the  con- 
trary, all  theory  and  experience  so  conclusively  show  that  a  larger  body 
of  this  kind  will  act  slower,  I  shall  not  stop  to  fatigue  the  Senate  with 
further  illustrations  upon  this  point. 

Another  objection  to  this  increase  of  judges  is  its  tendency  to  lessen 
the  ability  of  their  decisions. 

On  this  subject  I  am  not  disposed  to  be  captious,  and  to  disagree 
from  the  chairman  in  his  position,  that  a  greater  number  of  judges  might 
introduce  upon  the  bench  a  more  thorough  knowledge^  a  greater  num- 
ber of  our  codes  of  State  law.  But  I  do  deny  that  any  remedy  comports 
with  this  ground  of  increase,  unless  one  judge  is  selected  from  each 
State  in  the  Union,  so  that  the  peculiarities  of  each  may  be  thus 
understood ;  or,  unless  the  peculiarities  of  local  law  in  the  east  and 
north  are  as  fully  represented  and  understood  on  the  bench  as  those  of 
the  west  and  south-west. 


JUDICIARY   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  59 

But  as  to  the  knowledge  of  general  jurisprudence,  which  is  alone 
brought  to  the  decision  of  three-fourths  of  the  causes,  and  is  a  sine  qua 
7ion  in  the  examination  and  decision  of  all,  it  surely  is  not  likely  to  be 
increased  on  any  bench,  after  a  selection  of  four  or  five  persons  most 
distinguished  for  legal  attainments.  Such  is  the  structure  of  different 
minds,  such  their  habits,  associates,  and  exertions,  that  in  any  given 
circle,  whether  embracing  a  County,  State,  or  Confederacy  of  States, 
the  very  highest  in  intellectual  power  in  any  profession  are  few  in 
number,  and  a  marked  discrimination,  after  selecting  a  very  few,  can 
be  drawn  by  all. 

After  such  a  selection  for  any  bench,  every  additional  member  is  an 
injury,  rather  than  an  aid,  to  the  mass  of  professional  science,  because 
a  portion  of  the  time  of  those  more  highly  gifted  must  be  diverted  to 
the  instruction  and  conviction  of  those  who  are  inferior. 

While  I  am  willing  to  admit,  that,  on  this  reasoning,  no  precise  num- 
ber for  a  court  can  be  fixed,  as  unerringly  the  best,  under  all  circum- 
stances, yet  it  will,  on  reference  to  our  own  recollection  of  different 
judicial  bodies,  satisfy  us  that  an  increase  of  them  beyond  three  or  four 
is  not  likely,  in  most  cases,  to  increase  the  intellectual  strength  of  the 
whole  body. 

But  the  increase  operates  in  a  still  different  manner  on  the  members 
of  a  court,  so  as,  I  trust,  to  convince  all  of  its  injurious  tendency  upon 
the  general  ability  of  each  of  the  members ;  and  is,  therefore,  not  to  be 
made  beyond  the  most  usual,  approved,  and  safe  number  for  a  judicial 
body,  unless  some  separate  extraordinary  advantage  is  to  be  obtained  by 
it,  sufficient  to  counterbalance  all  the  incidental  and  obvious  evils  from 
such  an  increase. 

The  operation  of  which  I  now  speak  is  upon  the  industry,  fidelity, 
and,  if  I  may  be  pardoned  a  more  comprehensive  word,  the  responsi- 
bility, of  each  judge.  A  single  judge,  undoubtedly,  like  a  single 
executive,  insures  the  highest  exertions  on  his  part,  and  gives  to  the 
public  over  him  the  strongest  control.  But  if  the  number  be 
increased  to  only  two,  so  as  to  remedy  a  failure  of  justice,  in  his 
absence,  from  illness  or  accident,  they  may  disagree,  and  thus  cause  a 
still  further  failure ;  and  hence  three  is  often  preferred,  or  even  four, 
on  account  of  its  requiring  a  greater  proportion  of  the  whole  to  form  a 
quorum,  and  on  account  of  its  insuring  a  decision  when  only  a  quorum 
is  present  and  one  disagrees,  which  cannot  happen  with  a  quorum  of 
three.  To  attain  objects  so  important,  and  not  on  account  of  any 
quaintness  as  to  any  particular  number,  responsibility  has  been  in  some 
degree  diminished  by  increasing  the  court  beyond  one  member,  but 
still  taking  care  not  to  go  beyond  those  objects,  and  to  make  four 
judges  the  extreme  number  in  the  courts  of  common  law,  in  that 
country  whence  we  derive  most  of  our  institutions.  When  you  exceed 
four,  you  must  require  express  legislation  as  to  the  quorum,  or  the  unan- 
imity of  more  than  a  majority  in  any  decision ;  else  a  door  is  opened  to 
contradictory  decisions  in  the  same  court,  without  any  change  in  the 


60  JUDICIARY   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

members  of  it,  or  in  the  opinions  of  any  member.  Thus,  in  five,  the 
quorum  being  three,  two  of  them  may  decide  one  way  to-day,  and  to- 
morrow the  two  absentees,  attending  and  uniting  with  the  dissentient, 
may  decide  directly  the  other  way ;  and  every  addition  to  the  numbers 
of  the  court,  as  ably  shown  by  the  gentleman  from  Virginia  (Mr. 
Tazewell),  increases,  in  a  most  alarming  progression,  this  danger,  and 
also  diminishes  the  general  responsibility  of  each  judge.  If  you  cannot 
by  legislation  require  as  a  quorum  more  than  a  majority  of  any  court, 
as  contended  by  the  gentleman  from  Massachusetts  (Mr.  Mills),  or 
if  you  refuse  to  do  it,  as  on  Friday  last,  either  circumstance  fur- 
nishes a  most  conclusive  argument  against  any  further  increase  of  the 
judges. 

Gentlemen  have  talked  of  the  Court  of  Exchequer  Chamber  as  a 
precedent  for  as  large  a  number  as  ten,  without  incurring  danger.  But 
almost  all  the  duties  of  that  court  are  consultory  and  advisory  on  ques- 
tions adjourned  from  other  courts,  and  on  which  the  judgments  are 
entered  by  those  other  courts.  Moreover,  the  judges  of  that  court  are 
not  commissioned  as  ten  judges  of  that  court  esprit  du  corps,  but  still 
continue  as  judges  of  distinct  courts  of  only  four  in  number,  and  acting 
in  the  Exchequer  Chamber  together  but  seldom,  and  with  no  leaning 
or  dependence  on  each  other  as  a  whole  body,  so  as  to  weaken  their 
responsibility  as  members  of  their  separate  courts. 

Concerning  the  House  of  Lords,  also,  so  often  cited  as  a  precedent 
for  a  large  number  without  danger,  the  analogy  entirely  fails,  because 
that  House  acts  by  legislative  rules  in  the  making  and  the  reversal  of 
its  decisions,  — is  a  body  legislative  in  the  tenure  of  its  office,  legislative 
in  its  accountability,  and  altogether  aristocratical  in  its  whole  organiza- 
tion. Are  we  to  be  urged  to  create  a  similar  body  in  this  republic  ? 
and  to  believe,  as  Lord  Anglesey  once  argued,  that  because  "the 
Lords  were  judices  nati"  and  not  " under  salary,"  they  were  "there- 
fore in  reason  the  freer  judges " ?  "At  this  inimitable  piece  of 
lordly  reasoning,  it  is  said  the  Commons  were  weak  enough  to  be 
vexed  beyond  measure."  So  of  the  New  York  Court  of  Errors, 
referred  to  by  the  chairman  so  emphatically  as  a  precedent.  That 
court  also  acts  by  legislative  rules,  and  thus  is  not  exposed  to  the  dif- 
ficulties, as  to  a  quorum  and  fluctuating  decisions,  which  are  incident  to 
a  large  body  solely  judicial.  The  tenure  of  its  office  is  also  legislative, 
so  as  to  give  a  different  hold  over  their  responsibility ;  and  at  the  same 
time  their  salaries  are  small,  and  subject  to  reduction. 

I  shall  dwell  but  a  moment  on  the  analysis  of  the  injurious  effect 
upon  each  member  of  a  large  increase  of  the  number  of  any  collective 
body.  One  of  the  committee  (Mr.  Holmes)  has  partially  admitted 
this  effect.  Any  single  labor,  to  be  performed  jointly  by  ten  (and  so 
must  be  performed  judicial  duties  in  the  Supreme  Court),  naturally 
appears  to  impose  less  upon  each  than  if  it  was  to  be  performed  by 
seven.  Each  one,  also,  in  his  conduct,  stands  out  in  less  bold  relief  to 
the  public  eye.     Each  is,  from  the  well-known  frailty  of  man,  inclined 


JUDICIARY   OF   THE   UNITED    STATES.  61 

to  think  he  may  nod  with  greater  safety  while  so  many  others  watch. 
Do  we  not  daily  witness  this,  in  some  degree,  in  every  large  legislative 
body  1  Subjects  from  particular  quarters  of  country  —  subjects  con- 
nected with  particular  professions  and  tastes  —  intrusted  almost 
exclusively  to  particular  members  1  This  is  human  nature ;  and  we 
can  as  easily  escape  from  ourselves  as  escape  from  its  influence,  though 
under  much  greater  checks  and  responsibilities  as  legislators  than  as 
judges. 

Again  :  admitting  that  in  theory  each  person,  in  a  large  as  well  as 
smaller  body,  is  equally  subjected  by  law  to  censure  or  punishment, 
yet  it  is  settled,  even  to  a  proverb,  that  a  large  body,  either  from  a 
consciousness  of  its  increased  power,  or  from  a  parasite  propensity  to 
lean  on  others,  or  from  any  other  causes,  which  I  cannot  now  stop  to 
suggest,  will  at  times  adopt  measures  at  which  a  smaller  body  of  their 
own  number  would  blush. 

But  the  tendency  of  this  great  increase  in  the  number  of  judges 
of  the  Supreme  Court  ought  to  excite  peculiar  caution  and  alarm, 
under  our  present  constitution.  Because,  under  that,  beside  the 
smallness  of  number  properly  and  customarily  belonging  to  a  judicial 
body,  we  have  retained  no  check  whatever  upon  judicial  officers, 
except  in  impeachment :  this,  in  our  virtuous  state  of  society,  is,  as 
the  gentleman  from  Kentucky  (Mr.  Johnson)  cited  from  Mr.  Jef- 
ferson, a  mere  scare-crow ;  and  in  respect  to  judicial  science,  industry, 
and  talent,  never  was  intended  to  operate  at  all,  and  always  must 
prove  entirely  visionary. 

Other  governments  have  generally  provided  other  stimulants  and 
securities  for  these  qualities.  Securities  against  an  undue  devotion 
to  the  power  which  creates,  feeds,  and  alone  can  advance  higher,  the 
judges ;  securities  against  incapacity,  ignorance,  and  dotage,  in  judges. 
In  six  of  our  State  constitutions,  they  are  provided  by  making  the 
judges  eligible  for  only  a  term  of  years ;  in  ten  of  them,  they  are 
provided  by  making  them  liable  to  removal  by  address,  as  is  done  in 
England ;  and  in  almost  all  of  them  are  they  provided  by  making 
their  salaries  subject  to  reduction,  as  is  also  the  case  in  England. 

These  remarks  are  not  made  because  I  admire  less  than  others  lofty 
sentiments  of  judicial  independence.  I  do  not  say,  with  two  or  three 
other  gentlemen  on  Friday  last,  that  I  am  willing  to  alter  the  tenure 
of  judicial  office.  But  I  do  say,  that,  with  the  views  of  those  gentle- 
men, it  is  difficult  to  comprehend  how  they  can  consent,  by  increasing 
the  judges,  to  make  still  weaker  our  present  checks,  and  to  diminish 
a  responsibility  which  they  now  consider  too  small. 

No,  sir ;  I  make  these  remarks  because,  in  securing  judicial  inde- 
pendence by  a  tenure  of  office  virtually  for  life,  by  salaries  large  and 
undiminishable,  and  by  exemption  from  removal  on  address,  we  have 
palpably  gone  beyond  all  ancient  precedent  or  any  modern  example 
among  transatlantic  nations;  and  in  such  a  new,  if  not  hazardous 
experiment,  I  will  not  consent  to  go  still  further,  and  transcend  any 
6 


62  JUDICIARY   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

precedent,  in  any  age  or  nation,  by  making  a  body,  exclusively  judicial, 
as  large  as  ten,  with  no  other  checks  or  responsibility  than  are  now 
devolved  upon  our  Supreme  Court.  Gentlemen  seem  to  forget  the 
checks,  securities,  and  responsibilities,  of  the  large  bodies  to  which 
they  refer  ;  and  I  now  propose  to  them,  frankly,  that  if  they  will  cite 
to  me  a  single  body,  solely  judicial,  and  under  no  other  checks  and 
responsibilities  than  our  Supreme  Court,  —  whether  in  republics, 
monarchies,  or  despotisms,  —  that  I  will,  at  once,  withdraw  my  motion. 
No,  sir  :  we  are  launching  our  bark  upon  an  unknown  sea ;  we  are 
making  an  experiment,  and,  I  fear,  a  rash  one,  in  our  highest  judicial 
tribunal,  merely  to  remove  a  local  grievance;  we  seem — I  hope  I  may 
be  pardoned  the  expression — almost  sporting  with  the  momentous  sub- 
ject of  judicial  responsibility. 

We  knowingly  and  coolly  proceed  to  lessen  it,  while  avowing  that  it 
is  already  too  small.  I  had  always  supposed,  sir,  that  one  essential 
feature  in  a  republic  was  extreme  caution,  lest  those  who  receive 
power  should  forget  right.  That  its  governing  principle  was  checks, 
constant  checks,  and  eternal  vigilance.  And,  although  I  am  ready  to 
admit,  that,  with  no  constitutional  or  external  restraint  or  stimulant 
whatever,  some  men  may  be  so  happily  formed,  and  so  singularly 
endowed,  as  to  continue,  while  in  office,  to  improve  all  their  original 
excellences ;  yet,  in  the  sagacious  language  of  a  recently  deceased 
emperor,  they  can  only  be  called  "a  happy  accident."  The  argu- 
ment, if  pushed  to  its  legitimate  extent,  would  justify  us  in  abolishing 
all  checks,  and  in  throwing  everything,  with  unlimited  confidence,  and 
in  the  true  spirit  of  despotism,  into  the  iron  hands  of  power. 

Place  a  judge  in  such  a  condition,  and  though,  in  the  range  of 
possibility  or  chance,  he  may  continue  to  exercise  equal  diligence 
and  fidelity,  yet  all  experience  and  reasoning  render  it  probable  that 
his  attention  will  be  less  general,  and  his  energies  less  highly  excited  ; 
that,  in  truth,  he  will  be  likely  to  degenerate,  and,  by  being  placed  in  a 
body  legislative  in  number,  but  without  legislative  checks  and  excite- 
ments, he  will  naturally  become,  not,  to  be  sure,  in  our  state  of  society, 
so  livid  a  curse  as  Jeffries,  but  a  political  partisan  of  the  power  which 
made  and  maintains  him ;  a  parasite  for  secretaryships  and  foreign 
embassies ;  or,  if  of  a  less  busy  temper,  an  idle  dotard,  or  a  servile 
ipse  dixit  to  some  ambitious  associate.  What  is  here  anticipation,  is 
now  history  of  a  similar  officer  of  a  similar  temperament.  "  He  minds 
his  ease,  and  lets  things  go  how  they  will ;  if  he  can  have  his  eight 
thousand  dollars  per  annum,  and  a  game  at  1' ombre,  he  is  well." 

Again :  such  an  increase  will  not  only  tend  to  change  the  charac- 
ter of  the  individuals,  but  of  the  whole  body.  It  will  become  a  body 
of  a  legislative  rather  than  judicial  character,  like  the  House  of  Lords 
and  New  York  Court  of  Errors,  without  any  redeeming  legislative 
check  and  security,  such  as  exist  in  those  tribunals. 

By  the  increased  numerical  force  and  more  widely  diffused  per- 
sonal influence  of  such  a  court,  their  decisions  will  acquire  weight, 


JUDICIARY   OF  THE   UNITED   STATES.  63 

not  so  much  in  proportion  to  their  interest,  learning,  accuracy,  and 
strength  (and  which  we  have  shown  will  probably  be  diminished),  as 
in  proportion  to  the  great  number,  rank,  and  individual  popularity,  of 
the  members.  Thus  shall  we  impart  to  a  court,  which  some  of  the 
committee  have  already  pronounced  too  powerful,  an  additional  and 
at  the  same  time  most  dangerous  power,  in  a  tribunal  so  little  amenable 
to  the  scrutiny  of  public  opinion,  and  of  the  coordinate  departments  of 
government.  Reflect  a  minute  on  the  probable  consequences  of  such 
a  measure.  It  will  tend  to  mar  one  of  the  greatest  beauties  in  judicial 
decision  —  their  reliance  upon  mind,  and  mind  alone,  for  success. 
Next,  it  will  tend  to  sap  the  very  foundation  of  all  just  confidence  in 
lofty  judicial  integrity,  by  opening  a  door  to  that  lamentable  state, 
when  judgments  of  a  grand  judiciary  of  the  Union  may  be  considered 
as  mere  sectional  questions,  settled  on  eastern  or  western  votes, 
according  to  the  majority  on  the  bench  from  either  quarter ;  questions 
settled  only  for  a  season,  as  party  victories  or  political  expedients ;  and 
questions  settled  with  such  diminished  science,  research,  and  vigor,  in 
the  judgments  themselves,  as  in  some  instances  to  be  obeyed  only 
because  their  authors  exercise  command  over  the  prison  and  the  gal- 
lows. 

Especially,  in  a  government  of  laws,  is  it  to  be  discountenanced  that 
any  municipal  body  should  be  made  so  large  as  to  confer  on  their 
doings  a  popularity  derived  from  numbers  and  personal  rank,  without 
imposing  on  that  body  rigid  and  efficient  responsibility ;  and  least  of 
all  should  be  made  so  large  any  judicial  body,  and  particularly  one 
like  the  Supreme  Court,  where  causes  so  delicate  and  momentous 
yearly  come  to  judgment,  —  where  the  parties  in  interest,  sometimes 
empires  within  themselves,  cannot  and  should  not  be  satisfied  with 
anything  short  of  the  fullest  scrutiny,  the  widest  range  of  study,  the 
sternest  impartiality,  the  most  elevated  talents,  all  converged  upon  the 
questions  in  controversy,  and  then  judgments  pronounced,  which,  by 
their  inherent  excellence  alone,  may  be  destined  to  live,  like  much  of 
the  civil  and  common  law,  long  after  their  authors  have  mouldered 
from  memory.  Thus,  to  be  sure,  they  may  operate  more  slowly  and 
with  les3  eclat;  but,  in  the  end,  if  they  deserve  it,  triumphantly, 
like  the  silent  labors  of  many  master-minds  in  correcting  the  abuses- 
of  government,  and  in  freeing  from  restraints  and  monopolies  the 
commerce  of  the  world.  Thus,  alone,  too,  may  some  of  their  adjudi- 
cations chance  to  become  parts  of  the  living  and  speaking  law  of  every 
free  people,  and  to  accord  well  with  that  still  wider  and  higher  law,  of 
which  Hooker  says,  "  all  things  in  heaven  and  earth  do  her  homage; 
the  very  least  as  feeling  her  care,  and  the  very  greatest  not  exempt 
from  her  power." 

Another  mischief,  in  this  great  increase  of  the  judges,  is,  that, 
should  experience  require  a  return  to  the  former,  or  a  less  number, 
under  the  adoption  of  some  different  system,  you  never  can,  by  mere 
legislation,  remove  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  from  office.     I  speak 


64  JUDICIARY  OF   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

now  of  the  most  prevalent  doctrine  on  this  point.  But  you  have  no 
power  to  remove  them  by  address ;  their  office  is  not  for  a  term  of 
years ;  they  are  not  incapacitated  at  any  advanced  age ;  and  nothing, 
therefore,  will  be  able  to  displace  them,  but  the  grim  tyrant  who 
dethrones  all.  The  gentleman  on  the  committee  from  Maine  does, 
consequently,  with  great  propriety,  admit  that  this  increase  is  an 
experiment.  How  long  should  we  pause  upon  the  danger  and  magni- 
tude of  a  similar  experiment  in  the  executive  department,  which,  in 
its  structure  and  nature,  is  most  kindred  to  the  judiciary  ?  A  propo- 
sition to  double  the  number  of  the  executive  would  not  only  require 
an  entire  change  in  the  constitution,  but  what  patient  reflection  and 
long  deliberation !  But  now,  in  the  judicial  department,  designed  for 
the  greatest  stability,  a  similar  change  is  to  be  completed  in  the  hurry 
of  a  single  session ;  and  with  no  useful  effect  from  it,  even  in  anticipa- 
tion, but  the  removal  of  a  grievance  in  the  local  administration  of 
justice  in  a  single  section  of  country.  This  removal  can  be  effected 
by  other  remedies,  which  have  the  sanction  of  experience,  and  are 
entirely  free  from  danger ;  and  yet,  can  gentlemen  still  insist  upon 
this  experiment,  so  contrary  to  all  experience,  and  so  beset  with  the 
most  imminent  dangers  1 

The  immediate  consequence  of  adding  to  the  Supreme  Court,  at 
once,  a  number  equal  to  one-half  its  original  number,  and  equal  to  the 
whole  now  necessary  to  pronounce  any  decision,  and  all  this  addition 
to  be  made  from  one  section  of  the  country,  it  is  not  for  me,  at  this 
time,  to  prophesy.  But  nobody  can  be  so  purblind  as  not  to  see  the 
fatal  example  thus  set  to  future  Congresses,  and  to  the  different  States 
in  our  Union.  Do  gentlemen  believe  that,  hereafter,  equally  plausible 
apologies  cannot  be  found  for  a  further  increase  1  They  exist,  even 
now,  in  the  east  and  north,  for  a  still  larger  increase.  Because,  pass 
this  bill,  and  they  are  entitled  to  seven  more  judges,  on  some  of  the 
equal  principles  advanced  in  support  of  this.  Moreover,  these  apolo- 
gies will  multiply  in  numberless  grounds  in  every  section,  if  we  now 
pass  this  bill,  and  hereafter  push  into  practice  the  boasted  expansive- 
ness  of  the  principle  it  enforces.  Mark  the  progress  of  it.  At  the 
end  of  the  first  eighteen  years  of  our  government,  to  remove  a  local 
grievance,  we  add  a  single  judge  to  the  bench  of  the  Supreme  Court ; 
at  the  end  of  the  next  eighteen  years,  we  are  called  on  to  add  three 
more;  and,  pursuing  this  course  and  ratio,  at  the  end  of  the  next 
eighteen  years,  our  Supreme  Court  will  consist  of  nineteen  judges ; 
and,  in  only  thirty-four  years  beyond  that  time,  of  one  hundred  and 
twenty-seven  judges. 

Whether  we  shall  then  have  reached  a  point  to  be  stopped  by  the 
fear  of  patronage  or  expense  in  so  splendid  a  system,  or  whether  we 
then  shall  have  reached  a  point  of  practical  inconvenience,  will  depend 
altogether  upon  the  fashionable  opinions  of  the  age,  on  new  judicial 
theories,  on  plausible  apologies,  on  analogies  and  exigencies.  It  may 
then  be  justly  said,  as  now,  that  the  court  is  not  so  large  as  the 


JUDICIARY   OF   THE   UNITED   STATES.  ()5 

English  House  of  Lords.  Pardon  me,  sir ;  we  shall  never,  in  such  a 
career,  reach  a  point  of  fear  or  practical  inconvenience,  in  the  opinions 
of  any  quarter  of  our  Confederacy  which  may  hereafter  wish  to 
engraft  some  species  of  new  fruit  upon  the  old  stock.  Certainly  not, 
with  power  and  influence  in  any  profligate  hands,  that  might  seek 
hereafter  to  raze  to  its  foundation  any  principle  consecrated  by  their 
records. 

I  am  not  to  be  misunderstood :  I  speak  solely  of  the  tendency  of 
this  principle,  and  of  the  use  which  may  be  made  of  it,  under  the 
sanction  of  our  precedent,  when,  at  some  ill-starred  crisis,  the  ivinds 
blow  and  the  tvaves  beat ;  and  not  of  the  objects  or  motives  which 
now,  in  a  political  calm,  may  actuate  any  friend  of  the  present  bill. 

I  regret  that  the  nature  of  the  subject  has  forced  me  to  make  any 
sectional  allusions  or  examinations,  with  a  view  to  ascertain  the  extent 
and  character  of  the  sectional  grievances  the  bill  proposes  to  remedy. 
It  has  been  painful.  But  I  am  not  accustomed  to  shrink  from  what 
appears  to  me  a  duty ;  and  feel  conscious  that  no  honorable  mind  —  no 
person  who  knows  my  real  feelings  and  opinions  towards  the  regions 
to  be  affected  by  the  local  operation  of  this  bill  —  will  suspect  or  impute 
to  me,  towards  them,  anything  short  of  the  highest  respect  and  the 
kindest  wishes. 

If  the  passage  of  the  other  bill  on  your  table,  creating  another 
disti'ict  in  the  seventh  circuit,  will  not  remove  all  their  local  griev- 
ances, I  am  anxious  that  two  new  districts  may  be  formed,  with  cir- 
cuit powers ;  and  then  the  Supreme  Court  would  remain  untouched 
and  unendangered. 

If  this  will  not  satisfy  the  just  wishes  and  claims  of  the  six  new 
States,  I  am  willing  to  go  further,  and  adopt  any  reasonable  plan 
placing  the  whole  Union,  in  all  respects,  as  to  judicial  system,  on  the 
most  perfect  equality ;  taking  care,  however,  not  to  include  in  their 
plan  any  addition  to  the  Supreme  Court. 

But  I  have  not  embarrassed  this  motion  with  the  details  of  any  such 
system,  lest  the  force  and  bearing  of  the  general  principle  and  opera- 
tion of  this  projected  increase  of  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  might 
be  lost  sight  of  in  details  alone.  Yet,  that  the  Senate  may  not  be  in 
doubt  as  to  my  particular  views  concerning  such  a  system,  I  will 
merely  suggest  that,  with  only  our  present  number  of  judges  in  the 
Supreme  Court,  and  the  whole  Union  divided  into  seven  circuits,  with 
new  districts  whenever  necessary,  a  most  perfect  equality  would  be 
caused,  as  to  the  system  in  the  whole  Union,  in  the  three  old  Atlantic 
States,  as  well  as  in  the  six  new  States ;  and  this  enlargement  of  the 
circuits  would  be  in  analogy  to  former  changes,  including  Vermont, 
Rhode  Island,  North  Carolina,  and  Maine. 

If  to  the  district  judges  in  each  district  were  given  circuit  powers, 
all  the  business  could  be  transacted  with  despatch,  and  with  the 
addition  of  neither  a  host  of  circuit  judges  nor  judges  of  the  Supreme 
Court. 

6* 


66  JUDICIARY   OF  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

Once  a  year  only  the  judge  of  the  Supreme  Court  might  attend  in 
each  circuit,  to  sharpen  their  faculties  and  increase  their  knowledge  of 
local  law,  by  aiding  the  district  judge  at  nisi  prius,  and,  at  the  same 
time,  if  thought  best,  to  act  as  an  intermediate  tribunal,  on  law  ques- 
tions, between  the  district  judge  and  the  Supreme  Court.  The  district 
judges  are  now  competent  to  these  duties,  or  should  be  made  so ;  the 
law  even  now  devolving  these  duties  on  them,  in  the  absence  of  the 
judge  of  the  Supreme  Court. 

But  a  most  important  advantage  in  such  a  system  would  be  what  is 
suggested  by  the  Nashville  memorial,  and  what  most  imperiously 
demands  consideration  in  any  system,  that  it  leaves  to  the  judges  of  the 
Supreme  Court  ample  time  for  a  grave  and  thorough  and  prompt 
discharge  of  all  their  cardinal  duties,  as  the  great  balance-wheel  of  the 
whole  Confederacy. 

"  Were  the  Circuit  Courts  held  in  each  State  or  District  but  once  a  year,  this  would 
enable  the  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  to  hold  their  sessions  for  a  much  longer 
period  of  time,  to  complete  the  business  before  them.  The  inconvenience  of  having 
but  one  circuit  a  year  would  be  much  less  than  that  arising  from  the  great  delay 
which  now  exists  in  the  disposition  of  causes  in  the  Supreme  Court."  —  JYashville 
Memorial  —  Congressional  Register,  Ap.  75. 

But  this  project  is  merely  a  hint  en  passarit.  I  am  not  tenacious 
of  any  detail  in  any  change  which  shall  be  necessary  and  well  adapted 
to  remove  all  the  existing  grievances,  if  it  shall  not,  at  the  same  time, 
make  any  dangerous  inroad  upon  the  Supreme  Court  itself,  or  create 
a  host  of  unnecessary  judges  at  a  time  when,  I  sincerely  believe,  we 
have  ample  judicial  material,  if  duly  distributed,  for  all  the  legitimate 
business  of  our  Federal  Courts,  without  any  increase  whatever  of 
judges,  except,  perhaps,  one  or  two  new  district  ones  in  the  Seventh 
Court. 

Under  these  views,  I  had  intended  to  offer  some  further  remarks 
against  this  great  increase  of  judges,  on  the  general  ground  of  its  useless 
multiplication  of  offices,  its  useless  increase  of  executive  patronage, 
and  its  useless  addition  to  our  present  vast  expenditures.  Not  losing 
sight,  in  these  remarks,  however,  of  the  important  consideration,  that 
we  are  now  ten  millions  of  people  instead  of  three,  twenty-four  States 
instead  of  thirteen,  with  a  territory  doubled,  and  a  revenue  trebled. 

But  I  cannot  permit  myself,  at  this  time,  to  weary  longer  the 
patience  of  the  Senate.  I  have  invoked  their  attention  to  what  I  deem 
the  fatal  tendency  of  the  present  measure,  in  the  manner  my  sense  of 
duty  has  enjoined ;  and  if  my  warnings,  like  those  of  Cassandra,  should 
be  disregarded,  I  shall  only  add,  that,  for  the  welfare  of  my  country, 
they  will  not,  I  hope,  like  hers,  prove  true. 


MISSION  TO   PANAMA.  67 


MISSION  TO   PANAMA.* 

I  OWE  some  apology  for  the  violation  of  an  injunction  of  silence, 
which  circumstances  had  imposed  upon  me,  in  respect  to  the  merits 
of  the  proposed  mission  to  Panama.  I  had,  from  the  first  perusal  of 
the  documents,  entertained  but  one  opinion  concerning  its  probable 
danger  and  impolicy.  The  able  report  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign 
Affairs,  against  its  expediency,  remained  unanswered.  An  early 
decision  of  the  question  seemed  a  favorite  object  with  almost  every 
member;  and,  therefore,  I  had  supposed  that  little  benefit  would 
result  from  debate,  until  some  gentleman,  of  a  different  opinion  about 
the  mission,  should  attempt  to  shake  the  premises  or  conclusions  of  that 
report.  Nobody  had  made  this  attempt,  till  the  worthy  member  from 
Rhode  Island,  yesterday,  entered  the  field  of  argument.  Such  a  version 
of  the  documents  was  then  given,  and  some  such  principles  of  action 
avowed,  as  tended  to  alarm  my  mind  about  the  accuracy  of  its  previous 
convictions.  Last  evening,  therefore,  I  devoted  a  few  hours  to  the 
re-perusal  of  the  President's  confidential  communications,  under  a  fixed 
determination  to  renounce,  as  far  as  possible,  every  prepossession,  and 
follow,  in  my  vote,  whithersoever  their  facts  and  principles  should 
direct.  For,  I  must  confess  that  I  never  could  acquiesce  in  the  doc- 
trine avowed  by  the  ingenious  gentleman  before  mentioned,  that  he 
was  not  obliged  to  vote  for  the  resolution  on  your  table,  although  una- 
ble to  designate  any  error  in  the  statements  or  reasonings  of  the  report 
on  which  the  resolution  rests.  Will  he  inform  us  why  we  are  endowed 
with  reason,  unless  it  is  to  be  our  guide  in  action  ?  I  must  know  him 
too  well  to  believe,  for  a  moment,  he  could  intend  to  countenance  the 
slavish  position,  that  we,  of  course,  should  vote  against  any  resolution 
not  conformable  to  executive  recommendation.  But  his  mistake,  prob- 
ably, consisted  in  this :  conclusions  which  affirm  facts  contrary  to  all  our 
experience,  —  as  that  no  external  matter  exists,  though  we  are  hourly 
striking  our  feet  and  hands  against  external  substances,  —  may  well  be 
doubted,  however  ingenious  the  reasoning,  because,  the  facts  them- 
selves being  contradicted  by  indubitable  testimony,  there  must  be 
some  error  in  the  data  or  inferences  leading  to  such  conclusions.  But 
the  resolution,  that  it  is  not  now  expedient  to  send  ministers  to  Pana- 
ma, is  not  pretended  to  affirm  any  fact  thus  contradicted.  So,  con- 
clusions which  prostrate  all  distinctions  between  virtue  and  vice  may 
well  justify  us  in  doubting  some  of  the  statements  or  reasoning  which 
produce  them,  because  they  embody  what  is  palpably  contrary  to  the 
moral  law  written  on  the  hearts  of  all.     But  no  one  pretends  that  the 

*  Substance  of  a  speech,  delivered  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  March  1st, 
1826,  on  the  following  resolution,  reported  by  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs. 

"Resolved,  That  it  is  not  expedient,  at  this  time,  for  the  United  States  to  send  any 
ministers  to  the  Congress  of  American  Nations,  assembled  at  Panama." 


68  MISSION  TO   PANAMA. 

resolution  now  uncier  consideration  possesses  such  a  character ;  and, 
consequently,  like  most  propositions  in  legislation  and  politics,  it  must 
be  assented  to,  unless  some  one  can  discover  and  describe  a  fallacy  in 
the  grounds  upon  winch  it  has  been  vindicated. 

The  gentleman  from  Rhode  Island  seemed  to  possess  a  presenti- 
ment that  no  real  discovery  of  that  kind  could  be  made,  else  no  apol- 
ogy would  exist  for  his  resort  to  a  doctrine  so  novel  in  a  deliberative 
assembly,  so  abhorrent  to  every  feeling  of  rational  and  independent 
beings.  But  I  concede  that  he  afterwards  undertook  to  maintain  that 
this  Congress  at  Panama  was  merely  for  the  purpose  of  negotiating 
treaties ;  that  it  was  to  be  a  transient,  unorganized  assembly ;  that  it 
would  be  destitute  of  any  sovereign  powers,  and  that  its  objects  were 
altogether  peaceful.  If  this  had  been  successfully  maintained,  many 
of  the  positions  in  the  report  would  still  remain  unanswered.  But 
others  would,  surely,  be  shaken ;  and  hence  it  becomes  important  to 
ascertain,  as  accurately  as  may  be,  the  real  character  of  the  Panama 
Congress.  It  is  manifest  that  this  must  be  done  without  any  regard 
to  its  name  as  a  "  Congress,"  or  to  the  title  of  its  members  as  "  plen- 
ipotentiaries," on  both  of  which  so  great  stress  has  been  laid.  For 
the  word  "  Congress"  is  so  equivocal  as  to  be  applicable  either  to  a 
body,  in  point  of  power,  like  our  old  "  Congress"  of  A.  D.  1775,  or 
like  our  present  "  Congress,"  now  in  session,  or  like  the  "  Congress" 
of  Verona.  And  the  word  "  plenipotentiaries"  — meaning  only  per- 
sons with  full  power  to  do  what  is  assigned  to  them  —  is  elastic 
enough  to  include  delegates  for  any  objects  whatever.  Indeed,  our 
own  cabinet  seem  to  have  considered  it  as  mere  India-rubber,  or  else 
to  have  entertained  no  definite  notions  whatever  on  the  subject ;  since, 
in  the  documents  before  us,  they  have  called  the  persons  to  be  sent 
to  this  Congress  by  no  less  than  six  distinct  titles.  In  one  place, 
"envoys  extraordinary;"  in  another,  "ministers  plenipotentiary;" 
another,  "diplomatic  agents;"  another,  "commissioners;"  another, 
"deputies,"  and  in  another,  "representatives."  —  (See  President's 
nomination,  December  26,  1825;  Clay  to  Obregon,  November  30, 
1825,  page  8  and  9,  documents;  Clay's  Report,  December  20,  1825, 
page  4.*) 

But  the  origin,  object,  actual  power,  and  essential  character,  of  the 
assembly  at  Panama,  —  called  by  whatever  name,  or  its  members  by 
whatever  title,  —  appear,  in  some  degree,  in  the  documents  before  us ; 
and,  far  as  may  be,  I  admit,  must  be  settled  by  the  treaties  which 
created  it,  by  the  correspondence  of  the  States  interested,  and  by  the 
official  declarations  of  our  own  cabinet.  And  when  my  friend  from 
South  Carolina  adverted  to  pamphlets,  manifestoes,  and  reviews,  upon 
this  point,  it  was  only  to  exhibit  more  in  detail  what  is  essentially 
disclosed  in  the  confidential  communications  now  before  us. 

*  The  documents  referred  to,  and  the  pages,  are  those  as  printed  originally  and 
confidentially  by  the  Senate. 


MISSION  TO   PANAMA.  69 

In  a  consideration  of  this  question,  I  have  not  been  surprised  to 
find  that  different  gentlemen  should  fall  into  the  ancient  mistake  of 
the  two  dervises,  about  the  true  color  of  a  column,  painted  and  seen 
differently  on  different  sides  of  the  column.  Because,  an  inquiry  into 
the  papers  will  show  that  probably  this  Congress  will  possess  some 
powers  only  temporary  and  some  perpetual,  some  peaceful  and  some 
belligerent,  some  limited  and  some  sovereign;  and,  viewed  in  this 
double  capacity,  amphibious,  hermaphrodite,  and  not  designed  for 
either  of  the  above  purposes  exclusively,  many  discrepancies  of  opin- 
ion may  be  reconciled,  and  the  nature  and  consequences  of  the  mission 
will  be  better  understood. 

Thus,  the  permanency  and  the  present  belligerent  character  of  the 
Congress  at  Panama  can  hardly  admit  of  a  doubt,  when  we  advert  to 
the  treaties  before  us.  By  them,  it  was  not  to  be  a  sudden  and  tran- 
sient assembly,  because  it  was  provided  for  as  early  as  July  6th,  1822, 
by  a  treaty  between  Colombia  and  Peru,  and  without  the  slightest 
intimation  that  it  was  ever  to  be  dissolved.  (See  that  treaty,  in  doc- 
ument, page  27.)  Again :  to  rebut  any  such  inference,  it  is  to  be 
assembled  under  what  is  there  called  "  a  compact  of  perpetual  union, 
league,  and  confederation  (Article  2d) ;  and  of  this  '  perpetual 
union '  the  Congress  of  Panama  is  to  be  the  great  focus  and  organ. 
Its  main  objects  not  only  demonstrate  this,  but  characterize  its  dura- 
tion to  be  'perpetual,'  both  in  peace  and  in  war;"  because  it  is  to  be 
"a  council  in  the  great  conflicts,  as  a  rallying-point  in  the  common 
dangers,  as  a  faithful  interpreter  of  their  public  treaties,  when  diffi- 
culties occur,  and  as  an  umpire  and  conciliator  in  their  disputes  and 
differences."     (3d  Article.) 

How  can  gentlemen,  then,  talk  of  this  as  a  mere  collection,  or  Con- 
gress of  Plenipotentiaries,  to  negotiate  a  treaty  of  peace,  of  partition, 
or  commerce,  like  the  Congress  of  Utrecht  or  "Verona,  and  then  to 
dissolve  forever?  No.  Their  duties  are  to  interpret,  rather  than 
make  treaties ;  to  adjudge  upon  their  internal  disputes,  and  not  to 
form  new  codifications  on  national  law;  to  be  "a  council"  and  " ral- 
lying-point" in  their  present  common  "dangers,"  and  common  war 
for  "independence,"  and  not  a  meeting  of  mere  diplomatic  agents  to 
adjust  imposts  on  tonnage,  or  disputed  questions  of  the  "extent  of 
blockades." 

Such  duties  give  to  the  assembly,  formed  under  such  a  "perpetual" 
league,  as  lasting  a  character  as  belongs  to  any  judicial  or  political 
tribunal  on  earth ;  because  such  duties  cannot  cease  to  find  it  employ- 
ment till  the  passions  and  opinions  of  mankind  cease  to  differ,  under 
some  new  millennium,  or  till,  by  some  new  compact,  the  league  and 
its  representative  assembly  are  expressly  altered  or  dissolved.  Of  a 
similar  character,  in  many  respects,  have  been  the  origin,  progress, 
and  power,  of  other  associations,  — such  as  our  Confederation  of  A.  D. 
17  74,  the  union  of  the  Swiss  Cantons,  the  Hanseatic  League,  and  the 
Amphictyonic  Council  of  Greece. 


TO  MISSION   TO   PANAMA. 

The  progress  of  this  "  perpetual  confederation,"  and  of  the  Con- 
gress under  it,  since  July  1822,  confirms  these  conclusions  concern- 
ing the  duration  of  the  latter ;  because,  October  21,  A.  D.  1822,  it 
was  extended,  by  a  similar  treaty,  to  Chili  (doc.  p.  28) ;  March  15, 
A.  D.  1825,  to  Guatemala,  and  September  20,  A.  D.  1825,  to  Mexico 
(doc.  pp.  28,  35,  39).  In  each  of  them  is  the  confederation  expressed 
to  be  "perpetual,"  and  in  each  of  them  is  the  Congress  provided  for 
under  similar  language  as  to  its  powers  and  duties.  In  some,  it  is 
expressed  that  the  confederation  and  Congress  are  to  be  enlarged  till 
they  embrace  "all  the  States  of  America  formerly  Spanish;"  and,  in 
others,  they  seem  intended  to  embrace  all  the  "American  States." 
The  former  limitation  as  to  the  States  to  be  included  was  probably 
the  original  and  true  one,  on  account  of  the  common  origin,  common 
language,  common  sufferings,  and  common  war  for  the  same  objects, 
of  the  ci-devant  Spanish  provinces.  Hence,  we,  as  Anglo-American, 
and  of  a  different  origin,  language,  and  condition,  were  never  invited 
or  consulted  till  last  spring,  more  than  four  years  after  the  project 
was  started  (Canas'  letter,  November  14,  1825,  page  10),  and  about 
three  years  after  the  first  treaty  for  the  organization  of  the  Congress 
was  signed.  Even  then,  the  invitation  came  not  till  about  the  time  of 
the  sailing  of  a  French  fleet,  feared  to  be  destined  to  the  occupation 
of  Cuba  (Clay  to  Brown,  October  25,  1825,  page  58 ;  and  Clay  to 
Poinsett,  Nov.  9,  1825) ;  and  even  then  was  it  doubted  "whether  it 
would,  or  would  not,  be  agreeable  to  the  United  States  to  receive  such 
an  invitation"  (Mr.  Clay,  Dec.  20,  1825,  page  3)  ;  and,  even  to  the 
present  day,  the  invitation  has  not  been  extended  to  us  by  all  the 
parties  to  the  league. 

Still  the  Senate  are  vilified  for  not  joining  to  despatch,  post  haste, 
our  plenipotentiaries  to  form  a  part  of  this  "  perpetual"  Congress,  — 
a  Congress,  also,  of  such  novel,  and,  we  shall  soon  see,  of  such  dan- 
gerous powers ;  and  where,  among  other  States,  solely  Spanish,  we 
come  into  the  fold,  if  at  all,  not  by  the  door,  or  till  after  the  eleventh 
hour,  or  by  request  of  all  the  parties  concerned.  Under  circumstances, 
also,  when  most  of  the  delay  has  been  to  obtain  information,  not  yet 
full  as  is  desirable,  an  official  attempt  seems  to  be  made  to  lash  us  into 
greater  speed ;  and  the  dangers,  the  faction,  and  impropriety  of  the 
delay,  are  reiterated  in  every  form  and  region,  when,  since  these  very 
nominations  were  laid  on  our  table,  and  as  late  as  January,  1826,  the 
President  of  Mexico  has  publicly  and  officially  announced  to  the  world, 
that,  though  a  Spanish  State,  and  a  solemn  party  to  this  perpetual 
league  and  Congress  by  treaty,  their  plenipotentiaries  had  not  yet 
started,  but  might  be  expected  to  be  "at  sea,  on  their  way,  in  the 
course  of  the  present  month." 

But,  to  return  to  the  character  of  the  Congress  at  Panama  :  it  will 
appear  from  these  documents,  not  only  that  most  of  its  duties,  and  con- 
sequently its  duration,  are  permanent  or  "perpetual,"  but  many  of 
its  objects  are  clearly  belligerent.     This  position  leads  to  consequences 


MISSION   TO  PANAMA.  71 

entirely  independent  of  its  character  in  other  particulars ;  because, 
whether  its  members  be  mere  common  envoys  or  not, — whether  its 
continuance  be  long  or  short, — still,  if  its  leading  objects  are  belliger- 
ent, and  must  impart  an  inseparable  belligerent  character  to  the  assem- 
bly, no  neutral  nation,  however  well  disposed,  is  able  to  form  a  compo- 
nent part  of  that  assembly,  without  endangering  its  neutral  condition. 

I  have  been  utterly  astonished,  that  any  gentleman  could  read  these 
documents,  and  still  contend  that  this  was  not  a  belligerent  Congress. 
"What !  a  Congress  originating  with  those  engaged  in  war, — confined 
for  years,  in  its  incipient  stages,  to  those  only  who  are  engaged  in  war, — 
to  be  convened  within  the  territories  of  those  engaged  in  war, — and  hav- 
ing for  its  main  objects,  as  again  and  again  repeated,  the  triumphant 
prosecution  of  that  very  war, — and  yet  a  Congress  in  no  degree  bellig- 
erent, and  perfectly  safe  for  neutrals  to  unite  in?  To  remove  all 
question  on  this  point,  I  will  furnish  gentlemen  with  evidence,  till  the 
most  sceptical  ought,  I  think,  to  be  satisfied.  Thus,  in  the  treaty 
with  Chili  (Art.  394,  p.  23),  it  is  stipulated,  that  this  Congress  of 
Panama  shall  fix  their  respective  contingents  or  quotas  of  "sea  and 
land  forces"  during  the  present  war  with  Spain,  and  shall  form  "a 
rallying-point  in  common  danger."  By  the  treaty  with  Peru  (Pre- 
amble and  third  Article,  page  38),  the  cardinal  object  is  said  to  be  to 
"  maintain  in  common  the  cause  of  their  independence ;"  and  this  Con- 
gress is  agreed  to  be,  as  before,  "a  rallying-point  in  their  common 
dangers."  The  treaty  with  Mexico  is  similar,  they  being  "  confeder- 
ate forever  in  peace  and  war,"  and  this  Congress  their  "  point  of  union 
in  common  danger."  By  the  treaty  with  Guatemala,  their  design  is 
avowed  to  be  "to  identify  their  principles  and  interests  in  peace  and 
war"  (Preamble,  page  30)  ;  "to  repel  any  attack  or  invasion  from  the 
enemies  of  either"  (2d  Art.)  ;  and  further,  "  that  the  objects  contem- 
plated by  the  preceding  articles  may  be  carried  into  effect,  the  Repub- 
lic of  Colombia  engages  to  aid  the  United  Provinces  of  Central  Amer- 
ica with  that  amount  of  its  disposable  naval  and  land  forces  which 
shall  be  determined  by  the  Congress  of  Plenipotentiaries  to  be  men- 
tioned hereafter,"  &c.  (Art.  3  and  4),  and  which  is  afterwards  men- 
tioned as  the  Congress  "at  the  Isthmus  of  Panama"  (Art.  19th).  I 
would  respectfully  inquire,  if  gentlemen  can  point  me  to  a  parallel,  in 
the  records  of  history,  of  a  neutral  joining  with  "confederate  belliger- 
ents," in  a  Congress  like  this?  As  this  point  has  been  principally 
combated,  I  may  be  indulged  in  a  little  further  examination  of  the 
opinion  which  the  parties  themselves — who  best  understand  their  own 
affairs — have  expressed  in  other  documents,  concerning  the  paramount 
belligerent  object  and  character  of  this  Congress. 

The  government  of  Colombia  was  the  prime  mover  in  this  "perpet- 
ual league,"  and  in  its  "common  council"  in  the  great  conflict ;  and 
since  our  present  session  commenced,  her  vice-president  has  officially 
announced  that  "in  Panama  the  plenipotentiaries  of  the  new  States 
of  America  are  assembling  to  ratify,  in  the  most  solemn  manner,  our 


72  MISSION  TO   PANAMA. 

common  determination  to  maintain  and  defend  our  national  liberty 
and  independence  against  the  attempts  of  its  enemies."  Is  it,  then, 
a  mere  occasional  Congress  of  ambassadors,  with  no  belligerent  views  1 
When  our  old  Congress  convened  for  similar  purposes,  would  any 
European  neutral,  if  invited,  have  deemed  it  safe  to  form  a  component 
part  of  such  a  Congress  ? 

Again :  Mr.  Salazar,  at  the  head  of  the  legation  from  that  govern- 
ment (Letter  Nov.  2d,  1825,  p.  6),  formally  classes  the  subjects  for 
discussion  there  into  those  "belligerent"  and  those  "neutral;"  and 
Mr.  Obregon,  of  the  Mexican  legation  (Letter  Nov.  3,  1825,  p.  4), 
admits  that  "other  matters"  than  what  concern  us  as  neutrals  are 
there  to  be  canvassed,  and  that  they  grow  out  "  of  the  actual  position 
of  the  new  powers ;"  or,  in  language  without  any  diplomatic  nourish, 
that  they  grew  out  of  a  state  of  war. 

Mr.  Canas,  from  the  government  of  Central  America,  is,  if  possible, 
still  more  explicit,  and  describes  it  as  "a  general  Congress  of  their 
representatives  at  some  central  point,  which  might  consider  upon  and 
adopt  the  best  plan  for  defending  the  new  States  of  the  New  World 
from  foreign  aggression  (Letter  Nov.  11,  1825,  p.  11).  And 
again :  "a  general  Congress,  to  be  formed  for  the  purposes  of  pre- 
serving the  territorial  integrity,  and  firmly  establishing  the  absolute 
i?idependence,  of  each  of  the  American  republics."  If  these  are  not 
belligerent  objects,  I  am  unable  to  comprehend  the  force  of  language. 
The  President  and  the  Secretary  of  State  have  both  entertained  similar 
opinions ;  or  where  was  the  necessity  to  enter  so  many  caveats  and  pro- 
testations against  our  wish  to  compromit  our  neutrality  by  joining  the 
Congress  ?  How  could  our  neutrality  come  in  question,  if  there  were 
to  be  no  belligerent  deliberations  in  it  ?  If  there  were  to  be  no  belliger- 
ent deliberations  there,  how  could  the  former  person  say,  in  his  mes- 
sage, December  26,  1825  (p.  1),  that  we  are  "not  expected  to  take 
part  in  any  deliberations  of  a  belligerent  character"  ?  How  could 
Mr.  Clay,  December  20,  1825  (p.  3),  observe,  that  we  were  not 
desired  "to  take  part  in  such  of  the  deliberations  of  the  proposed 
Congress  as  might  relate  to  the  prosecution  of  the  present  war,"  if  no 
such  deliberations  were  to  be  held  in  the  proposed  Congress  ? 

A  Congress,  then,  springing  from  a  state  of  war,  to  be  composed,  as 
is  said  by  the  President  of  Colombia,  of  "  confederate  belligerents," — 
"  confederate  forever  in  peace  and  war,"  according  to  their  league,  and 
convened  chiefly  to  fix  their  contingents  of  troops,  and,  among  some 
permanent  peaceful  objects,  to  impart  greater  effect  to  their  common 
resistance  to  a  common  enemy,  and  so  concentrate,  by  a  great  common 
"council,"  all  their  energies  and  sacrifices,  so  as  best  to  advance  the 
cause  of  their  common  independence, — I  ask,  if  we,  however  desirous 
of  neutrality,  can  form  a  component,  and,  it  is  said,  prominent  part  in 
such  an  "august  assembly,"  without  extreme  hazard  to  the  happy 
peace  and  flourishing  commerce  we  now  enjoy?  Are  there  precedents 
for  this  course  on  our  part?     And  is  it  safe,  judicious,  discreet?     Is 


MISSION  TO   PANAMA.  73 

the  prospect  of  benefit  more  than  commensurate  with  the  danger? 
Would  it  not  be  a  little  more  prudent,  flagrante  bello,  and  while  these 
new  Spanish  States  probably  have  on  hand  sufficient  business  of  their 
own  for  employment, — would  it  not  be  wiser  to  defer,  till  peace,  the 
manufacture  of  new  national  law,  new  modes  of  commerce,  and  new 
changes  in  Roman  Catholic  faith  and  practice  ?  I  repose  the  most 
entire  confidence  in  the  assertions  of  our  own  cabinet,  concerning  their 
wishes  not  to  break  our  present  neutrality. 

But  the  inquiry  again  recurs,  Can  those  wishes  be  carried  into 
effect,  if  we  become  a  component  part  of  such  an  assembly  ?  As  a 
mere  Congress  of  Plenipotentiaries,  it  is  a  unit,  and  not  divisible.  It 
is  not  two  Congresses,  but  one  Congress ;  and  if  but  one  Congress,  and 
the  objects  and  origin  of  that  chiefly  belligerent,  then  what  becomes  of 
the  professed  neutrality  of  one  of  its  voluntary  members?  If  the 
minority  wear  a  white  rose  and  the  majority  a  red  one,  does  the  Con- 
gress become  any  the  less  a  war  Congress  ?  Can  any  kind  of  assem- 
bly, where  all  the  parties  are  previously  apprized  that  the  majority 
will  engage  in  belligerent  objects,  be  exempt,  in  any  of  its  component 
parts,  from  joint  political  accountability  ?  Gentlemen  may  call  it 
what  they  please,  —  a  Congress,  Convention,  Confederacy,  or  Caucus, 
—  and  can  it  assume,  both  at  one  and  the  same  time,  a  belligerent  and 
neutral  form  towards  a  single  third  power  ?  Can  it  be  treated  abroad 
as  a  belligerent  every  forenoon  sitting,  and  as  a  neutral  every  after- 
noon ?  A  Congress  subject  to  the  laws  of  war  with  closed  doors,  but 
exempt  from  them  with  open  doors?  How,  too,  are  its  officers  — 
quasi  combatants  or  non-combatants  ?  How  are  its  printers  ?  How 
are  its  incidental  expenses  divided  into  belligerent  and  neutral 
columns  ?  Are  there  two  modes  of  protecting  the  safety  of  its  mem- 
bers, and  the  independence  of  its  deliberations,  according  as  they  may 
be  differently  engaged  in  belligerent  or  neutral  duties  ? 

But  I  will  not  tax  your  indulgence  by  pursuing  these  inquiries 
further,  or  I  could  ask,  in  another  view,  whether  our  mere  presence  at 
such  an  assembly,  knowing  beforehand  its  hostile  objects,  and  uniting 
with  them  on  a  hostile  soil,  though  disclaiming  to  join  beyond  certain 
of  their  deliberations,  and  dividing  those  as  you  may,  would  not  alone 
be  likely  to  give  a  "  political  importance"  (as  Mr.  Salazar  calls  it, 
page  8)  to  those  Spanish  States  in  their  belligerent  attitude,  which 
might  be  construed  into  aid  and  comfort ;  and  which,  if  given  by  a 
subject  to  an  enemy,  whether  amounting  to  treason  or  not,  would  sub- 
ject him  to  troublesome  scrutinies ;  and  which,  when  given  by  one 
State  to  another,  cannot  be  very  far  from  a  violation  of  the  spirit  of 
neutrality  ?  But  I  hasten  to  other  considerations.  All  my  remarks, 
thus  far,  have  proceeded  on  the  hypothesis,  that  our  actual  intentions, 
in  joining  this  Congress,  were  in  every  respect  commendable  —  were 
entirely  pacific,  and  in  no  degree  connected  with  "the  prosecution  of 
the  present  war ;"  or,  as  Mr.  Clay  again  expresses  it  (28th  Decem- 
ber, 1825,  page  3),  "with  councils  for  deliberating  on  the  means  of 
7 


74  MISSION   TO   PANAMA. 

its  further  prosecution."  Are  all  our  intentions  so,  in  point  of  fact? 
I  trust  we  are  not  to  be  deceived  by  any  chaff  scattered  over  this  sub- 
ject by  the  wiles  of  foreign  diplomacy,  or  to  deceive  ourselves  by  any 
general  professions,  and  loose  protestations,  not  warranted  by  our  acts. 
Foreign  powers  cannot  be  thus  blinded ;  nor  can  the  American  people 
long  be  hoodwinked  in  this  way  into  any  "pledges,"  or  " secret"  alli- 
ances of  "  cooperation"  with  other  nations,  in  support  of  any  new-born 
theories,  or  any  experimental  principles,  not  conformable  to  our  ancient 
policy  and  our  true  interests. 

I  aver,  then,  that,  by  the  documents  before  us,  whatever  may  be  the 
verbiage  on  either  side  as  to  neutrality,  the  real  object,  as  disclosed 
on  the  side  of  Spanish  America,  in  alluring  us  to  this  Congress  at 
Panama,  is  to  involve  us,  in  the  end,  in  the  prosecution  of  the  present 
war.  I  will  attempt  to  show,  that  she  either  believes,  or  pretends, 
that  we  have  already  given  a  pledge  to  join  her  in  its  prosecution  in  a 
certain  contingency ;  that  she  never  invited  us  to  unite  in  the  Congress 
till  about  the  time  when  she  professed  to  believe  that  contingency 
would  soon  happen;  and  that,  in  all  her  correspondence  as  to  the 
objects  of  our  attendance,  she  thrusts  forward  into  the  first  rank  the 
discussions  as  to  the  mode  of  redeeming  that  pledge,  and  of  rendering 
effectual  our  '-cooperation"  with  her  upon  that  ground.  I  will 
attempt  to  show,  also,  that  a  part  of  our  cabinet  must  thus  understand 
her ;  and  that,  if  we  now  confirm  this  mission  for  such  an  object,  we 
do,  by  the  very  mission  itself,  bind  ourselves,  in  a  certain  contingency, 
to  future  hostilities,  unless  we  are  willing  to  be  branded  as  mere 
boasters  and  brawlers,  who  do  not  intend,  in  the  end,  to  redeem  our 
plighted  faith. 

In  support  of  these  positions,  Mr.  Obregon,  in  his  letter  of  Novem- 
ber 3,  1825,  page  4,  states,  as  the  reason  for  inviting  us  to  the  Con- 
gress of  Panama,  that,  tl  in  the  meeting  of  it,  it  was  thought  proper, 
by  the  government  of  the  subscriber,  that  the  United  States  of 
America,  by  means  of  their  commissioners,  should  constitute  and  take 
part,  as  being  so  much  interested  in  the  first  and  principal  object  upon 
which  the  Congress  would  be  engaged."  What  is  that  object?  Let 
the  same  gentleman  answer:  "The  resistance  or  opposition  to  the 
interference  of  any  neutral  nation  in  the  question  and  war  of 
independence  between  the  new  powers  of  the  continent  and  Spain." 
He  adds,  that  this  subject  "the  late  administration  pointed  out, 
and  characterized  as  being  of  general  interest  to  the  continent." 
He  proceeds,  upon  this  point,  in  language  too  explicit  for  misunder- 
standing: "The  government  of  the  undersigned  apprehends  that,  as 
the  powers  of  America  are  of  accord  as  to  resistance,  it  behooves 
them  to  discuss  the  means  of  giving  to  that  resistance  all  possible 
force,  that  the  evil  may  be  met,  if  it  cannot  be  avoided  ;  and  the  only 
means  of  accomplishing  this  object  is  by  a  previous  concert  as  to  the 
mode  in  which  each  of  them  shall  lend  its  cooperation"  &c.  The 
opposition  to  colonization  in  America  by  the  European  powers  will  be 


MISSION   TO    PANAMA.  75 

another  of  the  questions  which  may  be  discussed,  and  which  is  in  a  like 
predicament  with  the  foregoing.  The  two  principal  objects,  therefore, 
which  we  are  invited  to  discuss  there,  are  the  peaceful  question  of 
"resistance"  to  the  interference  of  any  other  neutral  nation  in  their 
present  war,  and  of  "resistance"  "to  colonization  in  America"  by 
any  European  power;  and  there  to  settle  "the  means  of  giving  to  that 
resistance  all  possible  force"  or,  in  other  words,  there  to  agree,  by 
"a  previous  concert,  as  to  the  mode  in  which  each  of  them  shall  lend 
its  cooperation."  Cooperation! — how,  or  when?  Of  course,  by 
money,  troops,  or  vessels  of  war,  whenever  Naples,  for  example,  may 
choose  to  aid  Spain  in  her  present  contest ;  or  whenever  Sweden,  for 
instance,  may  choose  to  purchase  from  her  Cuba  or  Porto  Rico. 

There  is  no  mistake,  on  this  point,  as  to  the  gist  or  essence  of  the 
mission.  I  care  not  for  any  formal  flourishes  concerning  neutrality. 
Nations  look  to  deeds,  not  words.  What  are  the  deeds  to  be  done 
there?  and  in  pursuance  of  what  is  done  there?  Mr.  Salazar, 
like  Mr.  Obregon  (November  2,  1825,  p.  7),  says:  "The  manner  in 
which  all  colonization  of  European  powers  on  the  American  continent 
shall  be  resisted,  and  their  interference  in  the  present  contest  between 
Spain  and  her  former  colonies  prevented,  are  other  points  of  great 
interest,"  to  be  discussed  by  us  at  Panama.  "Were  it  proper,  an 
eventual  alliance,  in  case  these  events  should  occur, —  which  is  within 
the  range  of  possibilities,  —  and  the  treaty,  of  which  no  use  should  be 
made  until  the  casus  fwderis  should  happen,  to  remain  secret"  &c, 
would  be  "different  means  to  secure  the  same  ends,"  &c.  "The 
conferences  held  on  this  subject  being  confidential"  &c,  are  we,  then, 
so  readily  to  slide  into  the  snares  of  artful  diplomacy  ?  And  are  we, 
by  this  mission,  to  form  an  "eventual  alliance  to  maintain  principles 
which  have  never  yet  been  avowed  but  by  one  department  of  our 
government,  and  which  alliance  is  to  be  kept  "secret"  from  the  people 
and  States  whom  we  represent?  Is  it  to  be  locked  up  here  as  "  con- 
fidential," till  the  casus  foederis  happens,  and  then  our  government 
branded  as  perfidious,  unless  they  join  in  the  war  ?  What  is  a  mere 
adoption  of  the  mission,  but  an  assent  to  this  dangerous  doctrine,  that 
we  are  now  pledged,  and  are  willing  to  remain  pledged,  in  certain 
events,  to  take  part  in  this  foreign  war ;  a  war  on  the  despotic  princi- 
ple of  maintaining  countries  more  remote  from  us  than  Europe  itself 
in  a  balance  of  power ;  a  war  on  the  reprobate  principle  —  the  princi- 
ple contradicted  by  all  the  practice  and  professions  of  our  early  admin- 
istrations —  of  interference  in  the  internal  concerns,  transfers,  colo- 
nizations, and  controversies,  of  other  nations. 

Nor  is  this  view  of  the  nature  and  tendency  of  these  principles 
confined  to  the  Spanish  States.  The  executive  department  of  this 
government  must  entertain  similar  notions,  and  is  now  virtually  call- 
ing upon  the  other  departments  to  oppose  or  reject  them.  The  Presi- 
dent himself  merely  speaks  of  "an  agreement  between  all  the  parties 
represented  at  the  meeting"  at  Panama  on  these  points  (Message, 


76  MISSION  TO   PANAMA. 

Dec.  26,  1725).  But  the  Secretary  of  State,  to  Mr.  Poinsett,  Oct. 
25,  1825  (p.  57),  says :  "  No  longer  than  about  three  months  ago, 
when  an  invasion,  by  France,  of  the  island  of  Cuba,  was  believed  at 
Mexico,  the  United  Mexican  government  promptly  called  on  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  United  States,  through  you,  to  fulfil  the  memorable 
pledge  of  the  President  of  the  United  States,  in  his  message  to  Con- 
gress of  December,  A.  D.  1823 ;  what  they  would  have  done,  had  the 
contingency  happened,  may  be  inferred  from  a  despatch  to  the  Amer- 
ican minister  at  Paris,"  &c.  Then  follows  that  despatch,  dated  Oct. 
25,  1825,  in  which  he  deliberately  avows  that  "we  could  not 
consent  to  the  occupation  of  those  islands  by  any  other  European 
power  than  Spain,  under  any  contingency  whatever."  The  same 
sentiment  is  repeated  to  Mr.  Middleton,  Dec.  26,  1825  (p.  47)  : 
"  We  cannot  allow  a  transfer  of  the  island  (of  Cuba)  to  any  European 
power."  Has  it,  indeed,  come  to  this,  that  we  are  to  tell  the  autocrat 
of  fifty  millions  he  has  not  the  same  right  to  take  a  transfer  of  Porto 
Rico  as  we  had  to  take  a  transfer  of  Florida  ?  Is  this  republicanism, 
equal  rights,  and  received  national  law, — or  is  it  some  marvellous  dis- 
covery of  the  present  age  ?  And  are  we  prepared,  by  this  mission,  to 
back  up  by  a  war  the  menace  to  France,  that  in  no  contingency  whatever 
shall  she  be  allowed  to  occupy  Cuba,  although  she  buy  it  of  Spain,  by  as 
fair  and  as  honest  a  treaty  as  that  by  which  we  purchased  Louisiana 
of  France  herself? 

Are  these  the  doctrines  of  the  American  Congress  or  of  the  Ameri- 
can people, — or  do  they  savor  of  the  Holy  Alliance?  Permit  me 
again  to  repeat,  that  there  is  no  mistake  on  these  points.  We  act 
with  our  eyes  open,  and  with  the  naked  principle  exhibited  in  so  many 
different  postures,  and  in  such  bold  relief,  that  if  the  mission  is  once 
sent  to  enter  into  measures  to  enforce  it,  the  die  is  cast  forever,  unless 
we  prove  perfidious  and  treasonable  when  the  contingency  occurs.  Mr. 
Poinsett,  28th  Sept.,  1825  (p.  54),  removes  all  doubt  on  the  other 
point  also;  because,  he  says,  "the  United  States  had  pledged  themselves 
not  to  permit  any  other  power  to  interfere  either  with  their  (Spanish 
American)  independence,  or  form  of  government ;  and  that,  as,  in 
the  event  of  such  an  attempt  being  made  by  the  powers  of  Europe,  we 
should  be  compelled  to  take  the  most  active  and  efficient  part,  and  to 
bear  the  brunt  of  the  contest,  it  was  not  just  that  we  should  be  placed 
on  a  less  favorable  footing  than  the  other  republics  of  America,  whose 
existence  we  were  ready  to  support  at  such  hazards." 

Eut  the  United  States,  as  a  government,  have  not  yet  pledged 
themselves  to  any  such  entangling  and  despotic  principle,  in  respect 
to  any  other  nation  whatever.  They  have  not  yet  agreed  to  "bear 
the  brunt  of  the  contest,"  in  any  foreign  war ;  nor  support,  at  "  such 
hazards,"  "the  independence  or  form  of  government"  of  any  nation 
or  state,  except  our  own  nation  and  those  of  the  States  composing  our 
own  Confederacy.  Any  such  "  agreement"  wTould  violate  the  consti- 
tution, and  plunge  us  into  a  vortex  of  new  coalitions  and  confederacies, 


MISSION   TO   PANAMA.  77 

abhorrent  to  every  feeling  and  maxim  of  our  venerated  fathers.  Avow- 
als of  such  principles,  whether  made  by  Mr.  Monroe  or  others,  are 
very  justly,  on  one  occasion,  styled  by  the  secretary  " uncalculating 
declarations."  (Letter  to  Mr.  Poinsett,  p.  56.)  But,  after  time  to 
calculate  and  consider,  let  me  ask,  in  the  name  of  all  which  is  sacred 
and  holy,  will  gentlemen  still  pronounce  a  mission  pacific,  and  safe, 
and  expedient,  whose  confessed  and  leading  object  is,  to  discuss  "the 
means  of  giving"  "all  possible  force"  to  our  "cooperation"  in  such 
principles'?  and  to  settle  the  mode  of  that  "cooperation,"  when  we 
are  called  on  "to  bear  the  brunt  of  the  contest," — to  settle  how  many 
of  our  gallant  sons  are  to  find  ignoble  graves  under  the  tropical  sun 
of  Guatemala,  if  some  petty  Hessian  prince  should  hire  a  regiment  of 
infantry  to  Spain  ?  or  how  many  of  our  fearless  seamen  are  to  be 
sacrificed,  to  prevent  other  nations  from  taking  possession  of  Cuba  or 
Porto  Rico,  in  the  same  manner  we  ourselves  took  possession  of  Lou- 
isiana and  Florida  ? 

Where,  also,  is  the  crisis,  where  the  emergency,  to  justify  such 
an  extraordinary  measure  7  "  Why  quit  our  own,  to  stand  on  foreign 
ground?"  Why  join  our  fortunes  in  any  case, — much  less  in  an 
useless  war  with  powers  of  another  origin,  another  tongue,  another 
faith  1  Have  Ave  become  incompetent  to  our  self-defence  ?  Are  we 
in  need  of  foreign  "councils,"  and  foreign  "deliberations,"  to  manage 
our  own  concerns ■?  Or  are  we  so  moon-struck,  or  so  little  employed 
at  home,  as,  —  in  the  eloquent  language  of  our  President,  on  another 
occasion,  when  the  sentiments  expressed  found  a  response  in  every 
patriot  heart,  —  as  to  wander  abroad  in  search  of  foreign  monsters  to 
destroy  ?  Speaking  of  America,  and  her  foreign  policy,  he  observed : 
"  She  has  abstained  from  interference  in  the  concerns  of  others,  even 
when  the  conflict  has  been  for  principles  to  which  she  clings  as  to  the 
last  vital  drop  which  visits  the  heart."  "Whenever  the  standard  of 
freedom  and  independence  has  been  or  shall  be  unfurled,  there  will 
her  heart,  her  benedictions,  and  her  prayers  be.  But  she  goes  not 
abroad  in  search  of  monsters  to  destroy.  She  is  the  well-wisher  to 
the  freedom  and  independence  of  all.  She  is  the  champion  and  vin- 
dicator only  of  her  own."  (Adams'  Oration,  4th  July,  1821.)  This 
is  the  first  time  that  the  legislative  department  of  our  government  has 
ever  been  distinctly  appealed  to  for  its  sanction  to  the  new  notions 
thus  ably  denounced  by  him ;  and  if  we  now  approve  the  Panama 
Congress,  whose  chief  object  is  to  enforce  them,  we  at  once  adopt  and 
approve  the  principle,  that  Spain  has  not,  by  such  alliances  as  national 
law  warrants,  and  as  were  formed,  on  both  sides,  in  our  own  Revolu- 
tion, any  right  to  attempt  to  reconquer  and  recolonize  South  America; 
and,  further,  that  she  has  not,  by  such  sales  as  national  law  warrants, 
and  as  we  ourselves  have  partaken,  any  right  to  transfer  Cuba  or 
Porto  Rico  to  any  European  power  with  whom  she  can  agree  upon 
the  purchase-money ;  and  that  these  unprecedented  and  unjust  posi- 
tions we  are  willing  to  maintain  at  any  sacrifice  of  blood  and  treasure. 
7* 


78  MISSION   TO    PANAMA. 

These  questions  have  no  concern  with  our  former  recognition  of  the 
independence  of  South  America,  any  more  than  with  our  recognition 
of  the  government  of  Spain,  under  her  Cortes.  That  recognition  was 
doubtless  proper  and  friendly ;  but  every  sciolist  in  jurisprudence 
must  know,  that  it  has  imposed  no  obligation  on  us  to  fight  with  her 
for  that  independence,  any  more  than  our  recognition  of  Napoleon 
bound  us  to  fight  with  him  for  the  throne  of  the  Bourbons. 

A  mission,  therefore,  for  these  avowed  objects  on  our  part,  and  with 
such  avowed  expectations  on  their  part,  seems  not  only  adverse  to  all 
the  theory  and  practice  of  this  government,  but  it  is  a  mission  which, 
in  all  human  probability,  must  ere  long  terminate  in  open  hostilities. 
These  hostilities  are  made  to  depend  on  only  one  of  two  contin- 
gencies, which  are  monthly  expected  to  occur.  Negotiations  for 
mediations,  &c,  have  postponed  more  active  measures.  But  the  great 
pacificator  of  the  eastern  continent,  even  when  living,  gave  us  no  just 
expectation  of  peace,  except  in  their  submission ;  and  now,  when  dead, 
the  shadows,  and  darkness,  and  storms,  that  seem  to  rest  over  the  suc- 
cession, exclude,  at  least,  all  better  hopes.  Spain,  too,  by  the  corre- 
spondence before  us,  has  signified  her  most  fixed  and  unalterable  resolve 
never  to  remit  exertions,  in  any  reverses,  however  desperate,  to  sub- 
due her  provinces.  (See  Mr.  Everett's  Letters,  ^ — 27th  April,  1825, 
and  25th  September,  1825,  and  October  20,  1825.)  In  this  crisis, 
new  efforts  and  new  arrangements  are  highly  probable,  and  are  to  be 
daily  expected. 

And  the  moment  a  Russian  frigate  may  enter  the  harbor  of  Havana 
to  take  possession  of  her  forts,  under  such  a  contract  as  that  by  which 
we  once  entered  New  Orleans,  that  moment  we  are  to  say,  by  the 
principles  of  this  mission,  that  the  United  States  have  become  obliged 
to  embark  in  the  existing  war.  Or,  the  moment  a  German  soldier  is 
landed  in  Paraguay  or  Peru,  to  aid  Spain  in  the  subjugation  of  any 
of  her  provinces,  we  are  to  say,  by  the  principle  of  this  mission,  that 
the  United  States,  unless  false  to  every  tie  of  honor,  and  recreant  to 
redeem  their  plighted  faith,  will  march  her  sons  over  equinoctial  sands 
and  frozen  cliffs,  more  distant  than  Europe  itself,  to  perish  in  this 
American  crusade  for  Holy  Alliances. 

But,  to  dwell  no  longer  on  these  points,  by  which,  already,  I  fear, 
the  patience  of  the  House  has  been  too  severely  taxed,  it  is  said  that 
other  objects  exist  in  the<  mission,  which  are  highly  desirable,  and  per- 
haps a  full  counterpoise  to  all  danger.  It  is  urged  that  we  shall 
increase  the  friendly  regard  between  sister  republics.  What,  sir !  is 
there,  in  such  a  regard,  any  counterpoise  to  war  ?  to  the  destruction 
of  our  commerce,  and  the  sacrifice  of  our  seamen  and  soldiery  3  Or, 
if  we  blink  the  contest,  and,  when  the  crisis  comes,  in  one  of  the  con- 
tingencies before  named,  if  we  skulk  behind  protestations,  and  procla- 
mations, and  diplomacy,  will  that  increase  fraternal  amity? — or,  rather, 
will  it  not,  after  the  present  deliberate  recognition  of  the  supposed 
pledge,  excite  hate  the  most  unquenchable ?     Will  it  be  "a  token  of 


MISSION   TO    PANAMA.  79 

respect  to  them,"  to  seek  to  delay  longer  their  threatened  invasion  of 
Cuba,  which  our  cabinet  can  see  no  "justifiable  ground"  to  oppose 
by  force,  though  they  can  see  such  ground  thus  to  oppose  any  peace- 
able transfer  of  it  to  any  European  power  1  or  to  protest  and  rail 
against  their  supposed  principles  of  arming,  in  that  invasion,  a  vast 
slave  population  against  their  masters,  and  of  reacting  all  the  bloody 
scenes  of  St.  Domingo,  so  near  our  southern  border  1  (Clay  to  Mid- 
dleton,  Dec.  26,  1825.) 

Will  they  consider  it  among  our  "good  offices,"  if  we  lecture  them, 
in  the  language  of  the  President,  about  their  ' '  religious  bigotry  and 
oppression"  ?  (Message,  Dec.  25,  1825.)  "  Some  of  the  southern 
nations  are,  even  yet,  so  far  under  the  dominion  of  prejudice,  that  they 
have  incorporated  with  their  political  constitutions  an  exclusive  church, 
without  toleration  of  any  other  than  the  dominant  sect.  The  abandon- 
ment of  this  last  badge  of  religious  bigotry  and  oppression  may  be 
pressed,"  &c.  As  I  understand  it,  the  very  faith  of  those  nations  is 
exclusive ;  and  are  we  about  to  undertake  missions  to  alter  the  reli- 
gious faith  of  other  nations  about  "an  exclusive  church,"  and  partic- 
ularly of  a  nation  a  large  portion  of  whose  officers  are  priests  of  this 
very  faith  ? 

How  many  missions  and  missionaries  must  we  despatch  to  effect  this 
object,  even  if  we  limit  our  benevolence  to  those  nations,  whether 
American,  European,  Asiatic,  or  African,  with  whom  we  enjoy  com- 
mercial intercourse,  and  who  retain  the  "  prejudice,  bigotry,  and 
oppression,"  of  an  "exclusive  church"  ?  On  this  principle,  my  own 
native  State,  for  aught  I  know,  will  next  be  blessed  with  a  mission, 
either,  from  us,  to  reform  its  "bigotry  and  oppression,"  or,  in  return, 
from  the  Panama  Congress ;  for,  by  express  prohibitions  in  her  consti- 
tution, not  a  single  Catholic, — much  less  Jew,  Mahometan,  or  Deist, 
— is  eligible  to  either  her  House  of  Representatives,  her  Senate,  or  her 
executive  chair;  —  indeed,  no  person,  unless  he  be  of  the  "  Protestant 
religion."  But  it  is  no  more  a  practical  oppression  there,  than  their 
"exclusive  church"  is  in  South  America;  the  Catholics  with  us,  and 
the  Protestants  with  them,  being  almost  unknown,  and  never  molested, 
with  us,  in  their  worship  or  political  rights. 

Again :  it  is  said  that  our  interests  can  be  promoted,  at  the  Congress 
of  Panama,  by  commercial  discussions.  But,  with  the  most  important 
of  the  States  there  represented,  we  now  enjoy  treaties  placing  us  on 
the  most  friendly  footing.  And,  if  the  other  deputies  should  come 
there  empowered  to  negotiate  on  these  points, — of  which  I  see  no  evi- 
dence in  these  documents,  —  we  are  not  so  likely  to  succeed,  when  so 
greatly  outnumbered,  and  in  the  midst  of  so  much  other  more  urgent 
business,  as  at  the  separate  court  of  each  power. 

Much  alarm  has  been  professed,  lest  England  would  join  the  Con- 
gress, and  forestall  us  in  some  advantages  in  trade.  But  the  spirit  of 
her  constitution,  and  the  disciplined  judgment  of  her  statesmen,  have 
kept  her  out  of  the  Holy  Alliance ;  and  would  equally  restrain  her,  I 


80  MISSION   TO    PANAMA. 

trust,  from  uniting  in  this,  had  she  been  invited.  Further,  we  have 
the  authority  of  Mr.  Clay  himself  for  saying  (Letter  to  Mr.  Poinsett, 
p.  57),  "that  such  an  invitation  has  been  given  to  no  European 
power ;  and  it  ought  not  to  have  been  given  to  this,  if  it  is  not  to  be 
considered  as  one  of  the  American  nations."  Every  treaty  and  docu- 
ment before  us  expressly  limits  the  Congress  either  to  the  nations 
ci-devant  Spanish,  or,  at  the  furthest,  to  the  nations  of  the  American 
continent. 

As  far  as  the  Congress  goes,  not  embracing  every  nation  here  any 
more  than  the  Holy  Alliance  embraces  every  nation  in  Europe,  it  is 
to  be  deemed  the  "  Continental  System  of  America"  (Canas'  Letter, 
Nov.  11,  1826) ;  and  I  trust  the  freest  nations  here,  like  the  freest 
nations  there  (such  as  England  and  Sweden),  will  not  be  beguiled  into 
it,  under  any  fallacious  notions,  that  intermeddling  and  force,  as  to  the 
concerns  of  other  States,  are  any  more  holy  on  one  continent  than  on 
the  other. 

No  less  questionable  is  the  expectation  that  such  a  mission  will 
terminate  in  any  improvement  in  the  codes  of  national  or  maritime 
law. 

In  the  midst  of  an  inveterate  and  bloody  war,  and  while  devising 
measures  to  consolidate  their  independence,  and  impart  greater  vigor 
to  their  arms,  the  chance  is  a  sorry  one,  and  the  leisure  scanty,  for 
adjusting  these  complicated  objects  of  peace. 

We,  also,  should  be  a  humble  minority  in  number,  in  the  discussion 
of  every  principle  of  this  kind ;  and  should  not  be  very  likely  to  per- 
suade persons  educated  in  the  bigotry  and  despotism  of  Spanish  prin- 
ciples to  think  like  the  descendants  of  the  "  sea-girt  isle,"  who,  for 
ages,  have  breathed  so  different  an  atmosphere,  in  law,  politics  and 
commerce. 

If  there  can  be  named  a  single  controverted  question,  on  these 
points,  where  the  interests  of  those  States  would  not  induce  them  at 
once  to  join  us  by  an  ordinary  negotiation  at  their  own  courts,  I 
frankly  avow  that,  with  all  my  prejudices  against  England,  as  the 
oppressor  of  our  fathers,  and  the  recent  enemy  of  ourselves,  I  would 
prefer  to  abide  by  the  enlightened  opinions  of  her  jurists  in  the  dis- 
cussion and  adjustment  of  it  —  men  who  have  grown  up  under  a  free 
press,  jury  trial,  representative  legislation,  a  habeas  corpus,  and  an 
independent  judiciary — than  to  abide  by  the  decision  of  Spain,  or  any 
limb  of  Spain  in  either  hemisphere.  Nobody  can  exult  more  highly 
than  myself  in  the  prospect  of  the  independence  of  the  ci-devant 
Spanish  provinces ;  but  there  must  expire  some  generations  more,  ere 
their  education,  laws  and  habits,  will  so  radically  change  as  to  con- 
vert them  into  safe  arbitrators  for  nations  like  ourselves.  Neither  can 
they  be  safe  counsellors  beyond  their  immediate  interests.  They  are 
not,  in  general,  of  a  like  origin,  a  like  religion,  a  like  language,  a  like 
system  of  laws ;  and  whatever  disputed  questions  of  national  law  are  to 
be  changed  or  adjusted,  in  which  their  interests  do  not  already  incline 


MISSION   TO   PANAMA.  81 

them  towards  our  views,  it  will,  in  my  opinion,  be  much  wiser  to  trust 
to  the  silent  and  gradual  operation  of  a  free  press,  of  books,  of 
increasing  civilization  and  commerce,  than  to  debating  assemblies,  in 
which  they  constitute  the  majority,  and  have  other  subjects  at  stake, 
far  more  momentous  and  urgent.  And  who  ever  heard  of  a  nation 
being  at  once  convinced,  against  its  interest,  by  the  plea  of  a  lawyer, 
or  the  argument  of  a  diplomatic  agent  1 

Again :  it  has  been  suggested,  by  the  gentleman  from  Rhode  Island, 
that  it  may  be  useful  to  have  this  mission  approved,  so  that  the  envoys 
may  watch  "  contingencies."  I  did  suppose  that  our  present  large 
foreign  corps  in  South  America — and  one  of  them  at  Colombia,  in  the 
very  neighborhood  of  this  Congress — might  be  sufficient  to  watch  "  con- 
tingencies." Or,  if  we  must  have  some  person  at  the  very  place  of 
meeting,  that  a  mere  agent,  without  public  credentials,  and  paid  from 
the  contingent  fund,  would  be  an  Argus  much  more  safe,  as  well  as 
successful,  in  watching  "contingencies."  One  incalculable  advantage 
from  such  a  course  would  be,  the  impossibility  of  thus  implicating  us 
in  the  character  or  measures  of  the  Congress,  and  the  freedom  we 
should  still  enjoy  as  to  embarking  in  the  present  war  voluntarily,  on 
the  occurrence  of  any  of  the  circumstances  already  commented  on. 
But  a  still  further  advantage  would  be,  that  our  course,  by  keeping 
quietly  at  home,  or  sending  only  such  an  agent,  till  we  have  further 
light  on  the  organization,  objects,  and  general  character  of  this  Con- 
gress, would  not  expose  us  to  any  censure  on  constitutional  grounds, 
or  on  grounds  of  rash  and  expensive  adventure,  upon  any  project 
dangerous  and  impracticable. 

For,  I  ask  gentlemen,  and  entreat  a  reply,  whether  they  are  now 
able  to  tell  us  the  whole  mode  of  proceeding,  and  the  binding  effect 
intended  to  be  given  to  such  proceeding  in  this  Congress. 

One  has  said  it  was  to  be  a  mere  ordinary  Congress  of  Plenipoten- 
tiaries, simply,  with  full  powers  to  negotiate  on  certain  points. 
Another  has  conjectured  that  it  would  be  a  Congress  like  the  old 
Provincial  Congress ;  and  that  our  delegates  would  form  a  component 
part  of  it,  and  be  bound  as  other  delegates  on  the  subjects  intrusted 
to  the  Congress.  Another,  seeing  the  difficulties  of  either  of  these 
hypotheses  on  the  documents  before  us,  has  insisted,  that  whatever 
may  be  the  true  character  of  the  Congress  itself,  we  were  not  to  form 
a  component  part  of  it;  but  merely  to  despatch  our  representatives  to 
reside  near  it,  and  negotiate  with  its  agents,  as  foreign  ministers  nego- 
tiate with  our  agents  here.  Some  of  these  views  have  been  presented 
in  debate,  and  others  in  conversation.  But  doubts  and  difficulties 
insuperable  seem  to  attend  either  of  them.  We  have  already  shown, 
by  numerous  and  clear  quotations  from  the  treaties  and  other  docu- 
ments, that,  so  far  from  being  an  ordinary  Congress  of  mere  diplomatic 
agents,  to  last  a  few  months  or  years,  and  then  be  dissolved,  some  of 
its  duties  are  perpetual,  and  are  judicial,  rather  than  diplomatic ;  and 
that  it  has  ever  been  destined  to  be  the  perpetual  head,  "council," 


82  MISSION   TO    PANAMA. 

and  rallying-point,  of  an  association  of  States,  under  a  "perpetual 
league."  These,  and  other  circumstances,  strengthen  the  second  con- 
jecture before  named,  of  its  resemblance  to  our  old  Congress ;  because, 
like  that,  it  is  convened  under  a  "  confederation"  of  independent 
States.  It  is  convened  under  a  similar  contest  for  liberty,  and  with  a 
similar  view  to  concentrate  their  hostile  efforts  in  promotion  of  the 
common  cause.  Like  that,  the  votes  of  each  State  are  equal  but  by 
means  of  their  representatives  being  equal  in  number ;  and  the  place  of 
meeting  is  subject  to  be  changed  by  a  majority  of  the  States  (Doc, 
p.  33).  The  names  given  to  these  representatives,  we  have  before 
seen,  are  various,  and  exhaust  almost  the  whole  vocabulary  as  to 
agents  with  delegated  power ;  and  consequently  settle  nothing  as  to 
their  specific  authority.  But,  like  our  old  Congress,  they  are  to  have 
"rules"  of  proceeding  (Obregon's  Letter,  p.  5),  and  a  regular  "organ- 
ization" (Mr.  Clay,  p.  4),  and  "  mode  of  action"  (do.),  and  to  be  thus 
formed  into  an  "assembly,"  and  with  all  these  things  "distinctly 
arranged  prior  to  the  opening  of  its  deliberations "  (do.);  else  they 
can  never  proceed  in  these  "deliberations,"  —  collect  and  register  their 
"votes,"  —  have  their  judgments,  as  "umpires"  in  disputes,  recorded, 
and  the  "quota  of  troops"  between  the  "confederates"  adjusted.  It 
is  true  that,  in  some  respects,  their  power  seems  greater  than  that  of  our 
old  Congress,  and  in  some  it  is  manifestly  less ;  though  neither  of  them 
are  permitted  to  encroach  on  the  separate  sovereignty  and  internal  police 
of  the  States  forming  the  confederation,  and  represented  in  the  Congress. 

But,  while  all  this  is  very  well  and  proper  for  those  "confederate 
belligerents,"  and  is  just  such  a  Congress  as  would  be  expected  among 
them  alone,  and  such  as  was  for  three  years  confined  even  in  theory  to 
them  alone,  as  before  explained,  it  is  very  apparent,  to  every  reflecting 
mind,  that  we  cannot  form  a  component  part  of  it,  by  any  clause  of 
power  conferred  on  us  in  our  constitution.  That  we  can  join  in  no 
other  permanent  political  assembly,  without  a  new  charter  from  our 
own  States ;  that  the  interpretation  of  our  treaties  cannot  by  us  be 
transferred  to  a  distant  tribunal  of  Spanish  deputies ;  and  that  we  must 
continue  the  umpire  of  our  own  disputes,  and  the  head  of  our  own 
Confederacy,  until  the  people  and  States  of  this  Union  consent  to  min- 
gle their  fortunes  with  other  confederacies,  to  be  lost  in  this  great  swarm 
of  Spanish  American  States,  —  to  become  a  single  satellite  to  a  larger 
planet,  and  with  no  more  power  in  the  great  Continental  Confederacy 
of  all  the  American  nations  than  Peru  or  Guatemala. 

Nor  can  it  be  tolerated,  for  a  moment,  that  they  will  admit  us  into 
such  a  Congress  as  a  component  part,  unless  we  are  to  be  bound  in  com- 
mon by  their  decisions ;  but  I  admit,  that  after  such  a  Congress  is  formed, 
it  may  be  considered  such  a  government  or  federal  State  that  we  could 
despatch  ambassadors  to  it  in  the  usual  way,  and  to  treat  with  it  on  usual 
subjects  for  negotiation ;  and  this  brings  us  to  the  last  conjecture,  as 
to  the  manner  in  which  our  envoys  are  to  go  and  act  at  Panama. 

This  hypothesis  would  accord  very  happily  with  the  usage  of  nations, 


MISSION   TO   PANAMA.  83 

in  despatcliing  ministers  to  our  old  Congress,  after  our  independence 
■was  acknowledged,  only  it  happens  unluckily  that  such  ministers 
cannot  take  part  in  the  deliberations,  of  any  kind,  of  such  a  Congress  ; 
and  that  our  ministers  at  Panama  are  again  and  again  said  to  be 
intended  "to  take  part  in  those  questions"  there  to  be  discussed 
(Obregon's  Letter,  p.  4),  "and  in  the  meeting"  of  which  Congress, 
"that  the  United  States  of  America,  by  means  of  their  commissioners, 
should  constitute  and  take  part."  (Ditto.)  They  are  also  to  have 
"persons  to  represent  them  in  this  assembly"  (Salazar's  Letter,  p. 
8);  and  how  else  can  it  be  "a  general  Congress  of  the  American 
Republics"?  (Canas'  Letter,  p.  11.)  And  if  our  ministers  are  to 
be  seen  only  in  the  galleries  or  lobbies,  like  other  foreign  ministers, 
what  becomes  of  the  splendid  illusion  sported  before  our  eyes,  that  we 
are  to  form  the  head  of  this  great  Continental  Confederacy,  and  play 
in  its  "council"  the  Nestor,  Agamemnon,  or  Ulysses,  or  all  of  them 
at  once?  In  this  view  of  it,  likewise,  how  can  our  ministers  be 
deputed  to  a  Congress  or  Confederacy,  with  whom,  as  a  quasi  State, 
they  are  to  negotiate,  until  that  Congress  is  organized?  Even  since 
the  nominations  on  your  table  were  made,  we  have  heard  that  the  depu- 
ties from  Mexico  had  not  started ;  and  no  information  has  yet  been 
received  of  its  being  organized  at  all,  for  any  purpose  whatever.  Why 
this  haste  to  plunge  into  new  experiments  and  unforeseen  dangers? 
Nor  in  this  last  view  of  the  mission,  if  there  be  in  any  other,  does  there 
yet  exist  any  protection  for  our  ministers,  any  guaranty  for  our  national 
honor.  If  they  enter  a  corner  of  the  territory  of  Colombia,  it  is  not 
under  a  commission  to  the  Colombian  government ;  and  we  have  no 
treaty  stipulation,  like  all  the  other  confederates,  as  to  the  persons  of 
our  representatives  at  the  Congress.  (See  all  the  treaties  in  docu- 
ments.) For  aught  which  appears,  they  may  be  imprisoned  for  debts, 
or  prosecuted  for  torts ;  and  the  sufferings,  and  claims,  and  remon- 
strances, of  other  Spanish  victims  like  Richard  Meade,  may  longer 
inflame  this  nation,  and  burthen  our  journals. 

In  fine,  under  none  of  those  delusive  expectations  as  to  certain  ill- 
defined  and  unattainable  objects,  at  the  imminent  hazard  of  our  neu- 
trality, or  with  a  view  to  redeem  pledges  which  this  government,  as 
a  government,  have  never  yet  given,  and,  I  trust,  never  will  give,  in 
defiance  of  all  the  policy  and  injunctions  of  our  wisest  statesmen,  and 
which  pledges  tend  directly  to  war,  —  I  hope  we  never  shall  be  incau- 
tiously allured  into  any  kind  of  alliance  or  connection  with  this  non- 
descript Congress  at  Panama. 

If  our  constitution  had  not  become  almost  a  mere  nose  of  wax,  I 
should  add  that,  if  the  Congress  be  a  permanent  confederacy,  for  any 
political  objects  whatever,  common  to  its  members,  we  cannot  become  a 
component  part  of  it  without  transcending  our  constitutional  powers ; 
or  if  we  are  not  to  form  a  component  part,  but  merely  have  ministers 
resident  near  it,  that  the  confederacy  must  be  organized,  before,  by  any 
construction  of  our  constitutional  powers,  a  commission  can  run  to  it. 


84  MISSION   TO    PANAMA. 

The  other  idea,  that  they  might  be  deputed  to  a  Congress  at  large, 
of  mere  plenipotentiaries,  to  negotiate  treaties  of  commerce,  or  peace, 
or  limits,  and  then  disperse,  —  and  that  they  could  so  be  deputed,  with- 
out any  guaranty,  by  treaty  or  otherwise,  for  their  persons,  and  without 
any  legal  provision  of  any  kind  for  the  creation  of  such  deputies, 
—  though  in  some  degree  questionable,  may  be  correct  in  the  abstract, 
for  aught  I  shall  now  stop  to  inquire.  But,  in  point  of  fact,  it  is  not 
correct,  from  these  documents,  that  the  Congress  at  Panama  is  a  body 
of  this  description ;  but,  as  before  shown,  it  is  a  Congress  formed  under 
a  perpetual  league,  with  perpetual  duties,  —  and  those  duties,  some 
belligerent  and  some  peaceful,  some  political,  and  some  judicial  and 
municipal,  and  no  more  to  be  joined  with  in  deliberation  by  a  mere 
envoy,  and  a  neutral  envoy  with  customary  powers,  than  we  are  to 
be  joined  with  in  deliberation  by  any  of  the  plenipotentiaries,  however 
respectable,  who  are  deputed  hither. 

Under  all  these  circumstances,  it  is,  in  my  opinion,  the  solemn  duty 
of  the  Senate  not  to  advise  this  mission :  the  solemn  duty  of  this  nation, 
under  such  doubt  and  peril,  not  to  try,  while  we  are  well,  to  be  better. 
I  would  wait,  in  patience,  till  at  last  we  obtained  that  more  specific 
information  about  the  powers,  and  character,  and  objects  of  the  Con- 
gress, wliich  the  President  himself  at  first  considered  indispensable 
(doc,  p.  4) ;  and  which  information,  to  the  extent  desired,  the  Secre- 
tary frankly  admits  has  never  yet  been  obtained.  (Letter,  Nov.  30, 
1825,  p.  10.) 

Peace  will  doubtless  arrive  as  soon  as  those  belligerent  powers  will 
enjoy  leisure  to  engage  with  utility  in  any  peaceful  improvements  with 
us,  —  Inter  arma  silent  leges ;  and  it  seems  to  me  the  dictate  of 
prudence  now  to  remain  contentedly  at  home,  without  embarking  in 
any  new  experiments  of  diplomacy,  or  of  coalitions  with  "  confederate 
belligerents ; "  to  pay  off,  as  fast  as  possible,  the  debts  of  former  wars ; 
to  husband  our  resources ;  to  encourage  our  States  in  the  cultivation 
of  the  arts,  of  manufactures,  and  of  agriculture ;  to  give  due  protection 
to  commerce,  and  retain  for  our  motto,  "Honest  friendship  with  all 
nations,  —  entangling  alliances  with  none"  Numerous  other  consider- 
ations press  upon  my  mind,  in  connection  with  this  mission ;  but  I  do 
not  choose  to  fatigue  an  attention  which  has  been  so  kindly  indulged  to 
me,  by  repeating  what  has  before  been  expressed  with  so  much  elo- 
quence by  the  gentleman  from  South  Carolina,  or  by  pressing  ad- 
ditional points,  which  other  members  will  doubtless  enforce  better,  at 
some  more  seasonable  hour. 

Under  these  convictions,  sir,  as  to  the  principles  of  the  mission,  I 
am  prepared  to  vote  against  it  in  every  shape ;  and  seek  no  higher 
vindication  for  my  conduct  than  the  consciousness  of  having  formed 
those  convictions  after  full  research  and  patient  reflection. 


(  UNIVERSITY   ) 
\  n  or        .,V/ 

SURVEY  AND   SALE   OF   PUBLIC  LANDS.  85 

SURVEY  AND   SALE  OF  PUBLIC   LANDS.* 

Perhaps  I  could  best  repay  the  kind  indulgence  of  the  Senate 
yesterday,  in  adjourning  so  early  to  accommodate  me,  by  an  entire 
silence  to-day.  But  it  was  my  lot  —  possibly  my  misfortune  —  to 
offer  an  amendment  to  the  resolution  which  has  occasioned  such  a 
long,  and,  in  some  respects,  unpleasant  debate.  The  amendment  was 
offered  in  that  spirit  of  kindness  towards  the  west  which  I  had  rather 
practise  than  merely  profess ;  and,  after  opinions  on  the  subject  had 
become  controverted,  it  was  offered  with  a  view  to  elicit  fully  the  real 
disposition  felt  in  this  body  concerning  the  surveys  and  sales  of  the 
public  lands.  The  unexpected  motion  to  postpone  both  the  resolution 
and  the  amendment  evidently  tends  to  defeat  a  distinct  expression  of 
opinion  upon  either,  and  has  opened  the  door  to  a  course  of  argument, 
and  a  latitude  of  discussion,  I  believe,  someAvhat  unprecedented.  It 
seems  to  have  metamorphosed  the  Senate,  not  only  into  a  committee 
of  the  whole  on  the  state  of  the  Union,  but  on  the  state  of  the  Union 
in  all  time,  past,  present,  and  to  come.  So  be  it,  if  gentlemen  please. 
This  is  not  alluded  to  in  the  spirit  of  rebuke  against  either  side,  as 
every  senator,  in  such  cases,  is  doubtless  at  liberty  to  pursue  the  dictates 
of  his  own  judgment,  and  is  doubtless  able  to  vindicate  his  own  course 
to  his  constituents  and  his  country. 

But,  in  one  view,  this  wide  range  of  discussion  has  proved  a  subject 
of  deep  regret  to  me,  individually,  as  it  has  led  gentlemen  into  remarks 
on  the  amendment,  and  on  matters  and  things  in  general,  some  of 
which  bore  personally  on  myself,  and  on  that  portion  of  my  constituents 
with  whom  I  had  the  pleasure  to  act  in  the  late  presidential  election. 
Those  remarks,  if  unnoticed,  may  lead  to  a  misapprehension  of  our 
real  opinions  on  questions  of  public  moment,  —  which  opinions  I  disdain 
to  conceal,  so  far  as  regards  myself,  —  and  to  imputations  on  those 
constituents  utterly  derogatory  and  utterly  unmerited,  —  imputations 
about  which  I  cared  little,  if  flung,  in  the  scavenger  slang  of  the  day,  on 
myself  alone,  because  I  have  long  been  inured  to  them  from  certain 
quarters,  like  all  other  men  in  the  east  who  refuse  to  bow  the  knee 
there  to  certain  political  dagons ;  but  imputations  against  which,  when 
gravely  made  by  conscript  fathers,  and  extended  to  a  large  body  of  my 
constituents,  I  feel  it  my  duty  to  defend  them,  here  and  elsewhere, 
now  and  henceforth,  while  I  have  power  left  to  defend  anything. 

But  let  us  first  advert  a  moment  to  the  amendment  offered  by  me  to 

*  A  speech  on  Mr.  Foote's  resolution,  proposing  an  inquiry  into  the  expediency  of 
abolishing  the  office  of  Surveyor  General  of  Public  Lands,  and  for  discontinuing 
further  surveys  until  those  already  in  market  shall  have  been  disposed  of;  and  which 
Mr.  W.  had  moved  to  amend,  so  as  to  inquire  into  the  expediency  of  extending  more 
rapidly  the  surveys,  and  hastening  the  sales  of  the  publio  lands.  Delivered  in  the 
Senate  of  the  United  States,  February  23,  1830.  This  was  the  only  instance  of 
indulgence,  while  in  the  United  States  Senate,  in  comments  on  party  politics;  and,  in 
this  case,  it  was  in  self-defence. 

8 


86  SURVEY  AND  SALE  OE  PUBLIC  LANDS. 

this  resolution,  and  my  opinions  on  its  subject-matter.  The  amend- 
ment has  been  treated  by  some  in  debate,  and  roundly  asserted  in  the 
numerous  libels  that  issue  from  the  epistolary  mints  in  this  city,  — 
those  manufactories  so  exorbitantly  protected,  —  to  be,  in  substance,  a 
proposition  to  give  away  the  whole  public  domain  of  the  Union. 
Whereas,  in  truth,  it  contemplates  nothing  beyond  an  inquiry  for  that 
light  and  information  so  earnestly  urged  by  others,  —  a  mere  inquiry, 
in  a  less  exceptionable,  less  questionable  shape,  into  the  expediency  of 
making  a  more  rapid  survey  and  sale  of  the  public  lands. 

The  reasons  for  that  inquiry  have  before  been  stated,  and  need  not 
be  repeated,  except  to  observe  that  they  rest  on  the  facts  of  increasing 
competition  in  the  sales  of  land  by  other  governments  on  our  northern 
and  south-western  frontiers ;  the  vast  quantities  yet  to  be  surveyed  and 
sold  by  ourselves ;  and  our  duties  to  the  new  States  equally,  in  respect 
to  the  survey,  sale,  and  settlement,  of  our  untaxed  domain,  within  their 
respective  boundaries.  To  discharge  such  duties, — to  give  a  wider 
sphere  for  choice  to  the  enterprising  yeomanry  from  the  east  and  the 
Middle  States,  as  well  as  the  west, — to  obtain  sooner  the  means  for 
extinguishing  the  public  debt,  that  great  mill-stone  on  the  neck  of 
every  popular  government, — all  will  admit  to  be  legitimate  objects ;  and 
an  amendment  seeking  these  objects  could  not  but  tend  to  fulfil  with 
promptitude  the  condition  on  which  most  of  these  lands  were  originally 
and  generously  ceded  to  the  Union.  This  is  the  whole  length,  breadth, 
and  depth,  of  the  amendment.  But  when  we  travel  beyond  the  amend- 
ment and  the  resolution,  to  speculate  on  what  has  been  done  and  what 
shall  be  done  with  these  lands  in  future  time,  after  paying  the  public 
debt,  then  these  lands  become  the  apple  of  discord,  —  then  we  open  a 
Pandora's  box  of  fears,  jealousies,  and  fierce  collisions.  On  this  point 
I  have  heretofore  said  nothing,  in  this  discussion;  and  should  say 
nothing  now,  had  not  my  views  on  the  disposition  of  these  lands  been 
misrepresented,  and  some  of  my  votes  at  former  sessions  perhaps  mis- 
understood. 

By  the  terms  of  the  grants,  I  had  always  supposed  that,  as  all  lands 
north  of  the  Ohio  were  expressly  obtained  "for  the  common  benefit 
and  support  of  the  Union,"  as  Congress  had  resolved  they  "  shall 
be  disposed  of  for  the  common  benefit  of  the  United  States,"  and  as 
the  residue  of  our  lands  was  purchased  by  our  common  funds,  no  doubt 
could  exist  that  they  must  be  used  and  granted  only  in  a  way  to  be 
beneficial  to  the  whole.  All  sales  of  them,  even  at  reduced  prices,  and 
whether  to  States  or  individuals,  would  always,  in  my  opinion,  be  thus 
beneficial,  if  competition  was  open  to  all ;  because  all  would  participate 
in  the  purchase-money  obtained,  and  all  could  embark  in  the  purchase 
itself.  The  hardy  and  enterprising  yeomanry  of  the  east  and  the 
Middle  States,  who  seem  almost  entirely  to  have  been  forgotten  in  this 
debate,  would  then  find  constantly  opened  to  the  ambition  of  themselves 
and  their  sons  the  benefit  of  lands  at  prices  within  their  frugal  means, 
and  under  democratic  institutions  of  their  own  choice ;  and  every  valley 


SURVEY  AND   SALE   OF   PUBLIC   LANDS.  87 

and  river  of  the  west  would  in  part  become,  as  many  of  them  are  now, 
vocal  with  New  England  tongues,  and  would  in  part  be  improved  and 
gladdened  by  New  England  industry.  So,  a  division  of  the  lands 
among  all  the  States,  who  are  as  joint  proprietors,  whether  divided  for 
specified  or  general  objects,  would  seem  to  me  a  disposition  of  them  for 
the  " common  benefit;"  but  whether  it  would  ever,  in  other  respects, 
be  a  judicious  disposition  of  them,  considering  the  new  relations  and 
dependency  it  might  create  between  the  General  Government  and  the 
States,  is  a  grave  question,  not  now  material  to  me  to  discuss.  On 
our  claim  and  title  to  these  lands,  the  State  I  partly  represent  has 
expressed  a  similar  and  decisive  opinion,  and  one  from  which  I  have 
yet  seen  no  sufficient  reason  to  dissent. 

"  Forasmuch,  therefore,  as  the  property  and  jurisdiction  of  the  soil  were  acquired 
by  the  common  means  of  all,  it  is  contended  that  the  public  lands,  whether  acquired 
by  purchase,  by  force,  or  by  acts  or  deeds  of  cession  from  individual  States,  are  the 
common  property  of  the  Union,  and  ought  to  inure  to  the  common  use  and  benefit  of 
all  the  States  in  just  proportions,  and  not  to  the  use  and  benefit  of  any  particular 
State  or  States,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  others  ;  and  that  any  partial  appropriation  of 
them,  for  State  purposes,  '  is  a  violation  of  the  spirit  of  our  national  compact,  as  well 
as  the  principles  of  justice  and  sound  policy.'  " —  JViles*  Reg.  p.  391.  Res.  of  N.  H. 
Leg.,  Jan.  22,  1821. 

And  further : 

"  That  each  of  the  United  States  has  an  equal  right  to  participate  in  the  benefit  of 
the  public  lands,  as  the  common  property  of  the  Union." 

Those  who  passed  that  resolution  sought  no  injustice  or  inequality 
towards  the  new  States.  The  democracy  of  New  Hampshire,  neither 
then  nor  now,  any  more  than  in  the  last  war,  would  refuse  any  aid  or 
relief  to  the  west  within  the  permission  of  the  constitution ;  they  could, 
neither  in  peace  or  hostility,  taunt  her  when  distressed,  nor  mock 
when  her  calamity  cometh.  Grateful  for  the  sympathies  and  kindnesses 
shown  them,  in  this  debate,  from  some  of  the  west  as  well  as  the  south, 
I  presume  they  stand  ready  now,  as  ever,  to  make  any  modification  in 
the  system  of  the  public  lands,  or  in  the  prices,  the  surveys,  or  the 
sales,  which  can  prove  useful  to  the  new  States,  and,  at  the  same  time, 
not  prove  unequal  or  unjust  to  the  old  States,  nor  conflict  with  the 
condition  of  the  original  cessions,  or  the  specific  powers  of  the  General 
Government  over  the  common  property  of  the  Union.  They  stand 
ready  to  do  this,  also,  because  it  is  right ;  and  not  to  form  new,  or 
perfect  old  alliances,  since  they  seek  no  alliances  with  the  south,  the 
west,  or  the  centre,  but  those  of  mutual  respect,  mutual  courtesy,  and 
mutual  benefits,  according  to  the  provisions  of  the  constitution. 

Such  a  division  of  the  lands  as  the  New  Hampshire  resolution 
approves,  without  reference  to  other  notions  concerning  what  has 
before  been  granted  for  education,  and  to  the  other  consideration 
before  named,  would,  to  every  unjaundiced  eye,  seem  to  keep  up  the 
symmetry  of  our  political  system  as  a  confederation,  and  not  a  con- 


55  SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS. 

solidation,  of  States ;  and  hence  would  keep  up  an  adherence  to  their 
mutual  rights,  as  States,  in  the  whole  public  property.  Any  such 
disposition  of  them,  if  effected  speedily,  would  likewise  relieve  Con- 
gress from  a  subject  of  legislation  most  burthensome,  invidious,  and 
vexatious.  Whether  our  bills  be  four  hundred  or  four  thousand,  on 
that  subject,  they  certainly  engross  much  time,  and  subject  us  to  vast 
expenditures.  Either  a  sale  or  division  would  bring  relief.  The  west 
would  be  double  gainers  by  either,  as  they  would  get  an  equal  share 
in  the  division,  and  a  speedy  power  of  taxation  over  the  whole. 

But  the  contrary  course,  of  a  yearly  scramble  for  scraps  of  these 
lands,  —  sometimes  for  roads,  sometimes  for  canals,  sometimes  for  asy- 
lums, and  sometimes  for  colleges, — seems  to  me  anything  but  a  dispo- 
sition for  the  "common  benefit,"  and  seems  likely  to  prove  an  endless 
source  of  favoritism,  jealousies,  and  corrupt  combinations.  If  the 
lands  do  not  all,  in  time,  become  thus  wasted  and  frittered  away,  for 
little  of  good  to  any  quarter,  they  surely  will  be  disposed  of  very 
unequally,  —  they  will  excite  dissatisfaction  in  the  States  not  made 
donees,  rather  than  tend  to  the  "support  of  the  Union,"  and  they 
will  be  appropriated  to  objects  not,  in  my  opinion,  specified  in  the 
constitution  as  within  the  cognizance  of  the  Government  of  the 
Union. 

The  test  adopted  by  some  gentlemen,  in  voting  for  a  grant  to  a  road, 
canal,  or  college,  —  that,  if  it  be  a  good  to  the  place  where  located, 
it  is  a  good  to  a  part  of  the  whole,  and  thus  a  good  to  the  whole,  — 
seems  to  me  a  very  convenient  argument  to  support  a  donation,  in  any 
place,  to  any  object,  however  limited,  if  the  object  be  only  beneficial 
in  any  degree ;  and  the  whole  domain,  certainly,  might  thus  be  taken 
off  our  hands  in  a  single  week.  To  contend,  also,  that  the  lands  may 
be  given  to  such  objects  in  small  quantities,  and  may  not  at  once  be 
given  to  one,  or  a  few,  or  all  the  States  themselves,  in  large  quanti- 
ties, seems  to  me  a  suicidal  position,  and  to  make  a  distinction  without 
a  difference. 

Not  examining  the  particular  kind  of  sales  the  government  can 
make  for  the  common  benefit,  —  such  as  grants  to  the  new  States  for 
schools,  receiving  virtual  compensation  therefor,  by  having  the  rest 
of  the  land  freed  from  taxation,  —  I  merely  lay  down  what  I  suppose 
to  be  the  general  principle. 

On  that  principle,  no  reasoning  has  been  offered  which  convinces, 
me  that  lands  can  be  legally  appropriated  to  any  object  for  which  we 
might  not  legally  appropriate  money.  The  lands  are  as  much  the 
property  of  the  Union  as  its  money  in  the  treasury.  The  cessions 
and  purchases  of  them  were  as  much  for  the  benefit  of  all  as  the 
collection  of  the  money.  The  constitution,  as  well  as  common  sense, 
seems  to  me  to  recognize  no  difference ;  and  if  the  money  can  only  be 
appropriated  to  specified  objects,  it  follows  that  the  land  can  only  be 
so  appropriated.  Within  those  specified  objects,  I  have  ever  been, 
and  ever  shall  be,  as  ready  to  give  lands  or  money  to  the  west  as 


SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  89 

the  east ;  but  beyond  them,  I  never  have  been  ready  to  give  either 
to  either.  Towards  certain  enumerated  objects,  Congress  have 
authority  to  devote  the  common  funds,  —  the  land  or  the  money,  — 
because  those  objects  were  supposed  to  be  better  managed  under  their 
control  than  under  that  of  the  States ;  but  the  care  of  the  other  objects 
is  reserved  to  the  States  themselves,  and  can  only  be  promoted  by  the 
common  funds,  in  a  return  or  division  of  those  funds  to  the  proprietors, 
to  be  expended  as  they  may  deem  judicious. 

The  whole  debate  on  these  points  goes  to  satisfy  my  mind  of  the 
correctness  of  that  construction  of  the  constitution  which  holds  no 
grants  of  money  or  lands  valid,  unless  to  advance  some  of  the  enu- 
merated objects  intrusted  to  Congress.  When  we  once  depart  from 
that  great  landmark,  on  the  appropriation  of  lands  or  money,  and 
wander  into  indefinite  notions  of  "  common  good,"  or  of  the  "  general 
welfare,"  we  are,  in  my  opinion,  at  sea  without  compass  or  rudder ; 
and  in  a  government  of  acknowledged  limitations,  we  put  everything 
at  the  caprice  of  a  fluctuating  majority  here,  —  pronouncing  that  to  be 
for  the  general  welfare  to-day,  which  to-morrow  may  be  denounced  as 
a  general  curse.  Were  the  government  not  limited,  this  broad  discre- 
tion would,  of  course,  be  necessary  and  right.  But  here  every  grant 
of  power  is  defined.  Many  powers  are  not  ceded  to  the  General  Gov- 
ernment, but  are  expressly  withheld  to  the  States  and  people ;  and  no 
right  is,  in  my  opinion,  given  to  promote  the  "general  welfare"  by 
granting  money  or  lands,  but  in  the  exercise  of  the  specific  powers 
granted,  and  in  the  modes  prescribed  by  the  constitution. 

Such  limitations  on  power  are  admitted  by  all  to  be  the  great  glory 
of  a  written  constitution ;  and,  since  the  Magna  Charta  at  Runny- 
mede,  can  never  be  long  violated  with  impunity,  among  any  of  Saxon 
descent. 

The  General  Government  is  well  known  to  have  been  created  chiefly 
for  limited  objects  connected  with  commerce  and  foreign  intercourse  ; 
and  so  far  from  being  unlimited  in  its  jurisdiction,  extent,  or  means, 
was  based  on  express  and  jealous  specifications,  and  designed  not  for 
the  prostration,  but  the  preservation,  of  State  rights  and  State  govern- 
ments, for  most  of  the  great  purposes  of  political  society.  Without 
going  further,  at  this  time  and  on  this  occasion,  into  the  argument, 
legal  or  constitutional,  upon  the  broad  and  the  strict  constructions,  I 
shall  content  myself  with  some  references  to  the  political  bearing  of 
these  constructions  on  the  public  lands,  and  on  the  great  topics  of  con- 
troversy introduced  into  this  debate,  and  to  some  signal  authorities  in 
favor  of  my  views,  found  in  the  records  of  the  General  Government, 
and  of  the  State  which  I  have  the  honor  in  part  to  represent.  A 
State  whose  instructions  I  shall  not,  like  the  senator  from  Maine, 
refuse  to  obey,  nor  deny  to  be  my  only  earthly  "  lord  and  master" 
rather  than  the  individual  " idol  or  image"  of  which  he  spoke  so 
reverently. 

We  all  know  that,  early  as  1794,  the  division  commenced  in  Con- 
8* 


90  SURVEY   AND   SALE    OF   PUBLIC   LANDS. 

gress,  between  the  advocates  of  extended  constructive  powers  in  the 
General  Government,  especially  in  its  executive  department,  and  the 
advocates  of  State  rights,  and  of  restricted  views  on  constitutional 
powers. 

In  relation  to  Jay's  treaty,  and  the  questions  connected  with  it,  the 
lines  began  to  be  distinctly  marked;  and  the  head  of  the  present  admin- 
istration was  found,  as  the  author  of  the  Declaration  of  our  Independ- 
ence was  found,  among  the  firm  opposers  of  indefinite  constructive 
powers ;  and  the  vote  of  the  former,  on  the  retirement  of  the  first 
President,  so  often  appealed  to  and  misrepresented,  in  the  late  canvass, 
by  his  opposers,  appears  to  have  been  predicated  entirely  upon  part  of 
the  policy  and  measures  then  pursued,  bearing  on  these  views  of  the 
constitution.  He  has  repeated  his  former  opinions,  in  his  message  at 
the  opening  of  this  Congress,  by  warning  us  not  "  to  undermine  the 
whole  system  by  a  resort  to  overstrained  constructions"  and  by 
warning  us  against  u  all  encroachments  upon  the  legitimate  sphere 
of  State  sovereignty."  The  same  course  of  division  among  our  lead- 
ing statesmen  was  evinced  in  the  debate  on  the  foreign  intercourse 
bill,  in  1798 ;  and  the  distinguished  agent  on  the  north-eastern  bound- 
ary, now  in  this  country,  then,  as  since,  bent  the  whole  force  of  his 
acute  and  profound  mind  to  show  the  evil  tendency  of  such  an  admin- 
istration of  the  General  Government.  The  alien  and  sedition  laws,  soon 
after,  brought  the  hostile  parties  to  a  crisis ;  and  then  the  strong  rea- 
soning of  Mr.  Madison,  in  the  Virginia  resolutions  of  1798,  and  the 
acute  mind  of  Mr.  Jefferson,  in  those  of  Kentucky,  and  the  whole 
influence  of  their  democratic  coadjutors  throughout  the  Union,  were 
concentrated  against  those  alarming  doctrines,  and  their  fatal  prac- 
tical consequences.  One  of  the  Virginia  resolutions  was  in  these 
words : 

"That  this  Assembly  doth  explicitly  and  peremptorily  declare,  that  it  views  the 
powers  of  the  Federal  Government  as  resulting  from  the  compact  to  which  the  States 
are  parties,  as  limited  by  the  plain  sense  and  intention  of  the  instrument  constituting 
that  compact,  as  no  further  valid  than  they  are  authorized  by  the  grants  enumerated 
in  that  compact ;  and  that,  in  case  of  a  deliberate,  palpable,  and  dangerous  exercise 
of  other  powers,  not  granted  by  the  said  compact,  the  States  who  are  parties  thereto 
have  the  right,  and  are  in  duty  bound,  to  interpose,  for  arresting  the  progress  of  the 
evil,  and  for  maintaining,  within  their  respective  limits,  the  authorities,  rights,  and 
liberties,  appertaining  to  them." — Virg.  Res.,  p.  4. 

Another  resolution  is  in  these  words  : 

"  That  the  General  Assembly  doth  also  express  its  deep  regret,  that  a  spirit  has,  in 
sundry  instances,  been  manifested  by  the  Federal  Government,  to  enlarge  its  power 
by  the  forced  constructions  of  the  constitutional  charter  which  defines  them ;  and  that 
indications  have  appeared  of  a  design  to  expound  certain  general  phrases  (which, 
having  been  copied  from  the  very  limited  grant  of  powers  in  the  former  articles  of 
confederation,  were  the  less  liable  to  be  misconstrued)  so  as  to  destroy  the  meaning 
and  effect  of  the  particular  enumeration,  which  necessarily  explains  and  limits  the 
general  phrases,  and  so  as  to  consolidate  the  States,  by  degrees,  into  one  sovereignty, 
the  obvious  tendency  and  inevitable  result  of  which  would  be,  to  transform  the  pres- 
ent republican  system  of  the  United  States  into  an  absolute,  or,  at  best,  a  mixed 
monarchy." — Virg.  Res.,  p.  9. 


SURVEY  AND   SALE   OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  91 

Mr.  Jefferson,  in  his  letters,  has  followed  up  the  same  ideas ;  and 
never  parted,  till  he  parted  with  life  itself,  from  this  democratic  view 
of  the  constitutional  compact. 

"  You  will  have  learned  that  an  act  for  internal  improvement,  after  passing  both 
Houses,  was  negatived  by  the  President.  The  act  was  founded,  avowedly,  on  the 
principle  that  the  phrase  in  the  constitution  which  authorizes  Congress  *  to  lay  taxes, 
to  pay  debts,  and  provide  for  the  general  welfare,'  was  an  extension  of  the  powers 
specifically  enumerated  to  whatever  would  promote  the  general  welfare  ;  and  this, 
you  know,  was  the  federal  doctrine.  Whereas,  our  tenet  ever  was,  —  and,  indeed,  it 
is  almost  the  only  landmark  which  now  divides  the  federalists  from  the  republicans, 
—  that  Congress  had  not  unlimited  powers  to  provide  for  the  general  welfare,  but  were 
restrained  to  those  specifically  enumerated  ;  and  that,  as  it  was  never  meant  they 
should  provide  for  that  welfare  but  by  the  exercise  of  the  enumerated  powers,  so  it 
could  not  have  been  meant  they  should  raise  money  for  purposes  which  the  enumera- 
tion did  not  place  under  their  action  :  consequently,  that  the  specification  of  powers 
is  a  limitation  of  the  purposes  for  which  they  may  raise  money."  — 4  Jeff.  Works, 
306. 

Other  remarks  of  his,  in  like  terms,  have  been  before  cited,  and  need 
not  be  repeated. 

They  were  opinions  which  then  endeared  him  to  a  majority  of  the 
Union,  and  in  1800  effected  the  first  great  political  revolution  in  the 
administration  of  our  General  Government.  They  were  the  views  of 
his  talented  successor,  in  after  times  as  well  as  in  1798,  as  evinced  in 
numberless  of  his  public  acts ;  and  they,  in  substance,  remained  the 
views  of  his  second  successor, — at  least,  during  his  first  term  of  office. 
They  long  constituted,  everywhere,  the  watch-word  of  democracy. 
With  many,  they  always  have  remained  the  strongest  test  of  political 
orthodoxy.  Such  was  Mr.  Jefferson's  own  remark,  late  as  1819. 
(4  Jeff,  306.)  And  though,  in  after  and  more  recent  days,  some 
departures  may  have  been  witnessed  in  our  ranks  from  these  doc- 
trines, yet  they  have  in  general  been  apparent  and  local,  rather  than 
real  and  general  departures  from  the  doctrines  themselves,  and  have 
existed  rather  in  a  difference  of  opinion,  in  particular  applications  of 
those  doctrines,  and  in  a  difference  about  details,  than  about  funda- 
mental views  on  the  true  mode  of  construing  the  constitution.  Some 
have  been  misrepresented  on  this  head ;  and  none,  I  believe,  sir,  more 
than  yourself.  These  differences  have  been  rather  "  the  clouds  that 
hang  on  Freedom's  jealous  brow,"  than  any  palpable  darkness,  or  any 
desertion  of  the  great  principles  contended  for  by  the  democracy  of  the 
Union  in  the  great  revolution  of  1800.  Some  differences,  and  honest 
differences,  may,  and  doubtless  do  exist,  on  this  point,  in  all  parties ; 
but  I  am  now  speaking  of  this  as  one  basis  of  the  change  in  adminis- 
tration at  that  era,  and  as  one  of  the  doctrines  of  the  party  at  large, 
as  a  party,  which  effected  the  change.  That  the  opinions  of  New 
Hampshire  have  coincided  with  the  views,  whenever  her  politics  have 
been  democratic,  and  that  I,  on  them,  as  on  the  subject  of  the  public 
lands,  am  representing  truly  these  sentiments  of  her  democracy,  and 
not  as  a  Jiidas,  so  courteously  insinuated  more  than  once,  is  easily 
demonstrable  by  a  reference,  not  to  namphlets  or  newspapers,  forgot- 


92  SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS. 

ten  or  fresh,  but  to  her  legislative  records.  While  that  State  contin- 
ued under  the  control  of  men  opposed  to  Mr.  Jefferson,  and  of  prin- 
ciples so  fatal  to  his  predecessor, — while  her  representatives  here  were 
voting  for  Aaron  Burr,  —  she,  as  would  naturally  be  expected,  voted 
against  the  doctrines  of  the  Virginia  resolutions. 

•But  when  politically  she  became  regenerate,  and  moved  in  harmony 
with  the  majority  of  her  sister  planets,  in  the  democratic  system,  — 
when  the  tendencies  and  progress  of  the  opposite  doctrines  — doctrines 
urged  so  often  and  so  strenuously  by  that  gentleman's  (Mr.  Holmes) 
"matchless  spirit  of  the  west,"  and  under  his  lead, — when  those 
tendencies  began  to  alarm  the  watchful,  and  call  forth  deliberate  and 
decisive  expressions  of  State  opinions  on  questions  so  dear  to  the  purity 
of  the  constitution,  —  New  Hampshire  came  out,  in  both  her  executive 
and  legislative  departments,  against  the  favorite  views  of  that  "  matchless 
spirit."  She  came  out  with  directness  and  independence,  as  sovereign 
States  ought  to  come  out,  on  all  great  emergencies.  She  showed  her 
disregard,  as  a  State,  of  men, —  whether  southern  or  eastern,  whether 
politicians  or  judges,  in  high  places  or  low, — who,  in  her  opinion,  had 
attempted  to  seduce  the  people  of  the  Union,  by  gradual  and  stealthy 
attacks,  into  the  same  enlarged  and  constructive  views  of  the  constitu- 
tion which  the  revolution  of  1800  had  openly  exposed  and  defeated. 

Her  executive,  in  June,  1822,  declared  (see  21  Niles'  Register) 
that : 

"  The  measures  of  the  National  Government  are  justly  regarded  as  subjects  of  great 
interest  to  the  people  ;  but  they  become  more  peculiarly  of  this  character,  when 
believed  to  be  founded  on  doubtful  or  erroneous  constructions  of  the  constitution, 
tending  to  an  extension  of  their  own  powers.  When  a  case  of  this  kind  occurs,  or 
even  if  it  appears  probable  that  it  is  about  to  happen,  it  becomes  the  duty  of  the  Leg- 
islatures of  the  individual  States  to  adopt  such  constitutional  measures  as  may  tend 
to  correct  the  error,  or  avert  the  evil." 

"  The  constitution  gives  to  Congress  the  power  '  to  lay  and  collect  taxes,  duties, 
imposts,  and  excises,  to  pay  the  debts  and  provide  for  the  common  defence  and  general 
welfare  of  the  United  States,'  and  immediately  proceeds  to  define  and  vest  the  spe- 
cific powers  which  were  deemed  necessary  to  effect  these  objects.  Amongst  these  it  is 
thought  none  can  be  found,  which,  on  any  known  principles  of  construction,  can 
authorize  Congress  to  expend  the  public  resources  in  mere  objects  of  internal  im- 
provement. The  power  to  impose  taxes,  to  pay  the  debts  and  provide  for  the  common 
defence  and  general  welfare,  seems  to  have  been  construed  as  a  specific  grant  of 
power  to  Congress  to  do  any  act,  or  adopt  and  carry  into  effect  any  and  every  meas- 
ure, without  restriction,  which  it  might  suppose  would  conduce  to  the  general  wel- 
fare.    This  construction  is  believed  to  be  wholly  unwarranted." 

"  When  we  advert  to  the  great  caution  with  which  the  powers  vested  by  the  con- 
stitution were  defined  and  guarded  by  that  distinguished  body  of  men  by  whom  it 
was  framed,  we  find  it  impossible  to  believe  the  indefinite  phrase  '  to  provide 
for  the  common  defence  and  general  welfare,'  in  the  connection  in  which  it  is,  to  be 
susceptible  of  that  broad  and  sweeping  construction,  which  must  of  necessity  merge 
in  it,  and  render  utterly  superfluous,  every  special  grant  of  power  in  that  instrument. 
A  power  to  provide  for  the  general  welfare,  without  restriction  or  limitation,  is,  in 
fact,  a  power  to  do  whatever  those  who  are  invested  with  it  choose  to  consider  pro- 
motive of  those  objects.  This  is,  in  truth,  the  power  of  a  despotism,  and  can  have  no 
place  in  a  free  government,  the  first  principle  of  which  is,  that  the  powers  delegated 
to  rulers  shall  be  distinctly  and  clearly  defined  and  limited." 

"  At  times  this  is  so  obvious  that  they  are  seen  to  possess  the  effrontery  to  endeavor 
to  influence  public  opinion,  by  boldly  affecting  to  hold  up  to  scorn  every  measure 


SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  93 

having  for  its  object  the  collection  of  a  wasteful  misuse  of  the  public  resources,  as 
unbecoming  national  dignity,  as  if  it  were  possible  that  real  national  dignity  and 
respectability  could  acknowledge  any  connection  with  profusion  and  extravagance." 

For  expressing  such  opinions,  that  executive  was  then  rebuked  by 
the  worshippers  of  enlarged  powers,  as  the  same  class  of  persons  now 
taunt  any  principles  or  measures  leading  to  reform,  or  any  men  who 
may  advocate  reform.  Here,  in  the  capital  of  the  Union,  it  was 
sneeringly  said,  "The  Hercules  approaches  who  is  to  cleanse  the 
xlugean  stable."  (National  Intelligencer,  June,  1822.)  The  advo- 
cates of  reform  wore  then,  as  now,  a  theme  of  daily  ridicule,  and  held 
up  for  the  "slow  unmoving  finger  of  scorn  to  point  at."  But  the 
Legislature  of  New  Hampshire  responded  to  the  executive  in  an  able 
report,  and  concluded  with  the  following  memorable  resolutions,  with 
scarcely  a  dissenting  vote : 

"  1.  Resolved,  That,  in  the  opinion  of  this  House,  the  constitution  of  the  United 
States  has  not  vested  in  Congress  the  right  to  adopt  and  execute,  at  the  national 
expense,  a  system  of  internal  improvements. 

"  2.  Resolved,  That,  in  the  opinion  of  this  House,  it  is  not  essential  so  to  amend  the 
constitution  of  the  United  States  as  to  give  the  power  to  Congress  to  make  roads, 
bridges  and  canals." 

She  thus  evinced,  on  this  point,  her  democracy,  and  her  jealous 
attachment  to  State  rights ;  and  this,  not  only  by  a  decision  against  the 
enlarged  powers  being  already  reposed  in  the  General  Government, 
but  declaring  it  "not  essential"  they  should  be  placed  there.  She 
believed  it  dangerous  to  the  welfare  and  independence  of  the  States 
either  to  give  these  powers  to  the  General  Government  by  construction 
or  express  grant ;  and  the  former  mode  was  only  the  more  alarming,  as 
it  united  usurpation  and  encroachment  on  State  rights  with  the  exer- 
cise of  a  power  that  she  believed  tended  directly  to  a  consolidation  of 
the  government. 

Gentlemen  may  describe  the  exercise  of  such  powers  as  beneficent 
and  splendid,  and  picture  a  government  with  them  as  having  all  the 
"pomp,  pride,  and  circumstance,"  of  Kussian  or  Assyrian  greatness. 
The  gentleman  from  Maine  (Mr.  Holmes)  may  again,  as  in  the 
Panama  debate,  paint  his  present  martyr,  then  his  "matchless  spirit 
of  the  west,"  sighing  for  such  a  "gorgeous  kingdom,"  —  "all  the 
natives  of  this  vast  continent  to  be  arrayed"  together  for  "the  great 
occasion,"  — and  the  whole,  "the  magnificent  scheme  of  the  favorite, 
the  genius,  the  master  spirit  of  the  west."  (2d  Reg.  Deb.,  270.) 
Others  may  reverse  the  picture,  and  describe  a  government  without 
these  powers  as  too  much  trammelled  in  its  movements,  as  ' '  palsied 
by  the  will  of  its  constituents,"  as  too  "rigid  in  its  expenditures,"  and 
certainly  as  too  plain  and  republican  in  its  institutions,  for  those  who 
talk  of  their  political  "lord  and  master,"  in  the  person  of  their  Presi- 
dents. But  nothing  seems  clearer  to  me  than  that  one  is  the  only 
true  government  to  preserve  and  perpetuate  a  mere  confederacy  of 


94  SURVEY  AND   SALE   OF  PUBLIC  LANDS. 

independent  and  democratic  sovereignties ;  and  the  other,  by  whatever 
name  baptized,  is  a  government  tending  to  consolidation  —  to  consoli- 
dation, not  of  the  Union,  but  of  all  political  powers  in  the  Union. 
The  difference  does  not  consist  so  much  in  words  as  in  things ;  not  in 
professions,  but  in  effects :  the  one  tending  to  a  republican  confedera- 
tion; the  other,  in  the  language  of  the  Virginia  resolutions,  to  a 
practical  "  monarchy." 

The  Virginia  resolutions,  page  13,  say,  further : 

"Whether  the  exposition  of  the  general  phrases  here  combated  would  not,  by- 
degrees,  consolidate  the  States  into  one  sovereignty,  is  a  question  concerning  which 
the  committee  can  perceive  little  room  for  difference  of  opinion.  To  consolidate  the 
States  into  one  sovereignty,  nothing  more  can  be  wanted  than  to  supersede  their 
respective  sovereignties,  in  the  cases  reserved  to  them,  by  extending  the  sovereignty  of 
the  United  States  to  all  cases  of  the  '  general  welfare,'  — that  is  to  say,  to  all  cases 
whatever." 

Grant  that  a  different  opinion  on  this  construction  has  now,  and  ever 
has  had,  from  Hamilton,  Ames,  and  the  elder  Adams,  honest  and 
able  advocates  ;  yet  the  tendencies  of  it,  whether  to  consolidation  and 
monarchy  or  not,  have  been,  and  are  still,  matter  of  fair  argument  and 
just  criticism.  In  that  view,  and  in  the  importance  of  this  construc- 
tion to  the  present  mode  of  making  donations  of  the  public  lands,  and 
to  a  just  judgment  on  the  imputations  cast  on  myself  and  my  constitu- 
ents, as  having  little  claims  to  real  democracy,  I  have  attempted  to 
vindicate  my  own  notions,  and  those  of  my  own  State,  without  a 
detailed  collection  of  the  reasoning  on  the  abstract  question,  and  with- 
out any  strictures  on  the  motives  of  those  who  differ  from  me.  A 
word  more,  and  I  dismiss  this  consideration. 

Who  is  so  blind  as  not  to  see,  in  the  approaching  condition  of  our 
government,  on  the  extinguishment  of  the  national  debt,  and  with  our 
present  enormous  duties  retained,  creating  a  vast  surplus  revenue  of 
ten  or  fifteen  millions  of  dollars, — who  does  not  see  a  cause  of  new  and 
most  fearful  apprehension  to  the  States,  if  all  that  surplus,  as  well  as 
all  the  public  lands,  can  and  shall  be  employed,  under  the  General 
Government,  in  objects  that  government  may  think  conducive  to  ' '  the 
common  good,"  or  "general  welfare"?  Who  does  not  see  a  door 
opened  to  favoritism  and  corruption,  which  may  let  in  irretrievable 
ruin  to  sound  political  justice  and  equality,  and  overwhelm  every 
vestige  of  State  independence  %  Who  does  not  see,  —  I  care  not  in 
whose  hands  administered,  —  I  say  the  same  in  a  majority  as  when  in 
a  minority, —  I  say  the  same  under  this  as  under  the  last  administra- 
tion,—  who  does  not  see  a  power  never  contemplated  at  the  formation 
of  the  constitution,  and  which  can  never  be  exercised,  under  our 
present  political  system,  without  tainting  to  the  core  both  those  who 
exercise  and  those  who  feel  it  1  Do  I  say  this  because  hostile  to 
internal  improvements  fl  No  !  but  because  hostile  to  the  degeneracy, 
if  not  the  ruin,  of  our  Confederacy;  and  because  I  would  advance 
internal  improvements  at  the  expense  of  the  States  and  individuals, 


SURVEY  AND   SALE   OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  95 

and  not  at  the  expense  of  the  Union.  I  would  do  it  the  only  way  they 
can  ever  be  advanced  with  safety  and  usefulness,  according  to  the 
resolution  of  New  Hampshire,  before  read,  and  in  those  cases  only  in 
which  individuals  and  States  can  see  their  private  and  local  interest  to 
be  so  much  promoted  by  these  improvements  as  to  warrant  the  under- 
takings by  themselves. 

Has  it,  then,  come  to  this,  under  such  a  government,  —  that  one  of 
the  parties  cannot,  in  any  way,  interpose  and  correct  its  ruinous  tenden- 
cies, and  its  insidious  constructions,  when  the  great  exigencies  of  the 
country  demand  it  1  I  think  there  has  been  more  apparent  than  real 
difference  on  this  point,  in  the  present  debate.  Most  must  admit  that 
they  can  interfere  in  some  way.  So  said  the  fathers  of  democracy  in 
'98,  so  said  the  Virginia  and  Kentucky  resolutions,  and  so  do  those 
say  whom  I  represent.  They  can  interpose  in  various  ways.  My 
theory  on  this  subject  may  vary  more  in  form  than  substance  from 
other  gentlemen's ;  but,  as  each  speaks  for  himself  on  this  floor,  I  may 
be  permitted  to  state  briefly  it  is  this :  That  the  parties  to  the  consti- 
tution are  the  agents  of  the  people  and  the  States  placed  in  the  Gen- 
eral Government,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  agents  of  the  people  placed 
in  their  State  Governments,  on  the  other  hand ;  and  that  the  people, 
separated  from  all  their  agents,  are  only  the  great  primary  power  and 
foundation  of  the  whole,  never  acting  as  one  whole  upon  or  about  the 
constitution,  either  legislatively,  executively,  or  judicially ;  but  acting 
on  it  in  those  forms,  or  any  others,  only  by  their  agents  in  the  States 
and  in  the  General  Government.  Yet  the  people  themselves  are  still 
a  power  behind  the  throne  greater  than  the  throne  itself:  and  intrench 
yourselves  as  you  may,  to  the  teeth,  in  parchments  and  constructions, 
they,  by  their  agents,  in  convention  in  the  States,  can  abolish  every 
institution,  political  or  civil,  of  the  Union,  or  of  their  respective  States. 

The  parties,  then,  in  collision  as  to  the  extent  of  the  powers  given  by 
the  constitution  of  the  Union,  are  seldom  the  people  with  their  agents 
of  either  class,  and  never  so  any  length  of  time,  without  a  sufficient 
redress ;  but  the  opposing  parties  are  generally,  on  the  one  hand,  the 
agents  of  the  people  and  the  States  under  that  constitution,  and,  on 
the  other  hand,  their  agents  under  the  State  constitutions.  I  say  the 
agents  of  the  people  and  States  in  the  General  Government,  as  the 
States  are  technically  represented  here  in  the  Senate,  and  may  always 
technically  and  solely  choose  all  the  electors  of  the  executive  branch. 
The  former  agents,  acting  in  the  administration  of  the  General  Gov- 
ernment, caused  it,  properly  enough,  in  common  parlance,  to  be  called 
the  General  Government ;  and  the  latter  agents,  acting  in  the  States, 
are  called  a  State  Government.  The  State  Government  is  the  gov- 
ernment which  is  primary  and  indispensable.  The  people,  as  such, 
unless  in  a  revolutionary  condition,  cannot  cast  a  single  vote,  hold  a 
single  town-meeting,  or  lay  out  a  rod  of  ordinary  highway,  except 
through  State  power  and  State  agency.  I  shall  not  repeat  what 
reasoning  and    illustration    the    gentlemen  from    Kentucky    (Mr. 


96  SURVEY  AND   SALE   OF   PUBLIC   LANDS. 

Rowan)  and  South  Carolina  (Mr.  Hayne)  have  adduced,  in  proof 
of  these  views,  but  merely  cite  a  clause  in  the  Virginia  resolutions 
of  J98,  to  show  that  these  views,  whether  right  or  wrong,  were  the 
views  of  the  fathers  of  the  democratic  party ;  and  if  I  err,  I  err  with 
the  Platos  and  Socrates'  of  my  political  faith.     (Virg.  Res.,  p.  8.) 

"  The  other  position  involved  in  this  branch  of  the  resolution,  namely,  c  that  the 
States  are  not  parties  to  the  constitution  or  compact,'  is,  in  the  judgment  of  the  com- 
mittee, equally  free  from  objection.  It  is,  indeed,  true  that  the  term  '  States '  is  some- 
times used  in  a  vague  sense,  and  sometimes  in  different  senses,  according  to  the  sub- 
ject to  which  it  is  applied.  Thus,  it  sometimes  means  the  separate  sections  occupied 
by  the  political  societies  within  each  ;  sometimes,  the  particular  governments  estab- 
lished by  those  societies  ;  sometimes,  those  societies  as  organized  into  those  particular 
governments  ;  and  lastly,  it  means  the  people  composing  those  political  societies,  in 
their  highest  political  sovereign  capacity.  Although  it  might  be  wished  that  the  per- 
fection of  language  admitted  less  diversity  in  the  signification  of  the  same  words,  yet 
little  inconveniency  is  produced  by  it,  where  the  true  sense  can  be  collected  with  cer- 
tainty from  the  different  applications.  In  the  present  instance,  whatever  different 
constructions  of  the  term  *  States,'  in  the  resolution,  may  have  been  entertained,  all 
will  at  least  concur  in  that  last  mentioned  ;  because,  in  that  sense  the  constitution  was 
submitted  to  the  *  States,'  in  that  sense  the  '  States  '  ratified  it,  and  in  that  sense  of 
the  term  '  States '  they  are  consequently  parties  to  the  compact  from  which  the 
powers  of  the  Federal  Government  result." 

The  States,  then,  being  one  party,  is  it  to  be  contended  that  still  the 
other  party,  the  General  Government,  may  adopt  any  extended  con- 
struction of  the  powers  granted  under  the  constitution,  without  any 
efficient  right  on  the  part  of  the  States  to  murmur,  remonstrate,  alter, 
or  resist  ?  Certainly  not,  I  should  think,  on  either  side  of  the  debate. 
But  how  far  can  they  go,  and  "  where  shall  their  proud  waves  be 
stayed  "  ?  The  opinion  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  a 
tribunal  appointed,  organized,  and  accountable  only  to  one  party  to  the 
government  and  to  the  decision,  is  urged  on  us  to  be  the  great  final 
balance-wheel  of  the  whole  machinery.  But,  if  the  States  be  another 
party  to  the  compact,  it  is  manifest  that,  on  ordinary  principles  of 
compact,  they  have  the  same  right  as  the  opposite  party,  or  its  agents, 
to  decide  on  the  extent  of  the  compact.  This  is  conceded  between  two 
parties,  in  the  case  of  treaties,  and  in  the  case  of  ordinary  bargains 
and  conventions ;  and  it  cannot  be  denied  here,  admitting  we  have 
shown  the  States  to  be  one  party,  unless  both  the  parties  have 
expressly  agreed  upon  some  tribunal  intermediate,  as  an  umpire  or 
judge,  to  decide  irrevocably  this  kind  of  diiferences  between  the 
parties  to  the  constitution.  On  the  other  hand,  I  understand  it  to  be 
argued  that  the  Supreme  Court  has  been  agreed  on  as  such  a  tribunal. 
But  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  would  not  be  likely  to 
be  so  agreed  on,  reasoning  a  priori ;  because  its  members  are  all 
appointed  by,  and  answerable  to,  only  one  of  the  parties ;  and,  indeed, 
go  to  form  a  portion  of  one  of  the  parties,  being  mere  agents  of  the 
General  Government.  The  amendments  of  the  constitution,  reserving 
rights  and  powers  to  the  States  or  people,  would  be  nugatory,  a  mere 
mockery,  if  the  suicidal  grant  was  made  to  the  Supreme  Court,  to  the 


SURVEY  AND   SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  97 

mere  agents  of  one  party,  to  decide  finally  and  forever  on  the  extent 
of  all  their  own  powers.  The  reasoning  for  this  grant,  therefore, 
appears  to  me  argumentum  ad  absurdum,  as  clear  as  any  axiom  in 
Euclid.  But  on  this  head  I  am  anxious  not  to  be  misapprehended, 
and  am  willing  to  resort  to  the  words  of  the  charter  itself,  to  see  what 
the  legitimate  powers  of  that  court  purport  to  be  in  deciding  such 
controversies. 

From  the  very  fact  of  there  being  two  parties  in  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment, it  would  seem  a  necessary  inference  that  the  agents  of  each 
party,  on  proper  occasions,  must  be  allowed,  and  are  required  by  an 
official  oath,  to  conform  to  the  constitution,  and  to  decide  on  the  extent 
of  its  provisions,  so  far  as  is  necessary  for  the  expression  of  their  own 
views,  and  for  the  performance  of  their  own  duties.  This  being,  to  my 
mind,  the  rationale  of  the  case,  I  look  on  the  express  words  of  the 
constitution  as  conforming  to  it,  by  limiting  the  grant  of  judicial  juris- 
diction to  the  Supreme  Court,  both  by  the  constitution  and  by  the  acts 
of  Congress,  to  specific  enumerated  objects.  In  the  same  way  there 
are  limited  grants  of  judicial  jurisdiction  to  State  courts,  under  most 
of  the  State  constitutions.  When  cases  present  themselves  within 
these  grants,  the  judges,  whether  of  the  State  or  United  States,  must 
decide,  and  enforce  their  decision  with  such  means  as  are  confided  to 
them  by  the  laws  and  the  constitutions.  But,  when  questions  arise 
not  confided  to  the  judiciary  of  the  States  or  United  States,  the  officers 
concerned  in  those  questions  must  themselves  decide  them ;  and,  in  the 
end,  must  pursue  such  course  as  their  views  of  the  constitution  dictate. 
In  such  instances  they  have  the  same  authority  to  make  this  decision 
as  the  Supreme  Court  itself  has  in  other  instances. 

Thus  the  Virginia  resolutions,  page  18,  say : 

"  However  true,  therefore,  it  may  be,  that  the  judicial  department  is,  in  all  ques- 
tions submitted  to  it  by  the  forms  of  the  constitution,  to  decide  in  the  last  resort,  this 
resort  must  necessarily  be  deemed  the  last  in  relation  to  the  authorities  of  the  other 
departments  of  the  government;  not  in  relation  to  the  rights  of  the  parties  to  the 
constitutional  compact,  from  which  the  judicial,  as  well  as  the  other  departments,  hold 
their  delegated  trusts.  On  any  other  hypothesis,  the  delegation  of  judicial  power 
would  annul  the  authority  delegating  it ;  and  the  concurrence  of  this  department  with 
the  others,  in  usurped  powers,  might  subvert  forever,  and  beyond  the  possible  reach 
of  any  rightful  remedy,  the  very  constitution  which  all  were  instituted  to  preserve." 

Thus  Mr.  Jefferson  says : 

M  They  contain  the  true  principles  of  the  revolution  of  1800  :  for  that  was  as  real  a 
revolution  in  the  principles  of  our  government  as  that  of  1776  was  in  its  form,  —  not 
effected,  indeed,  by  the  sword,  as  that,  but  by  the  rational  and  peaceable  instrument 
of  reform,  the  suffrage  of  the  people.  The  nation  declared  its  will,  by  dismissing 
functionaries  of  one  principle,  and  electing  those  of  another,  in  the  two  branches,  the 
executive  and  legislative,  submitted  to  their  election.  Over  the  judiciary  department 
the  constitution  had  deprived  them  of  their  control.  That,  therefore,  has  continued 
the  reprobated  system;  and  although  new  matter  has  been  occasionally  incorporated 
into  the  old,  yet  the  leaven  of  the  old  mass  seems  to  assimilate  to  itself  the  new;  and, 
after  twenty  years'  confirmation  of  the  federal  system  by  the  voice  of  the  nation, 

9 


98  SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS. 

declared  through  the  medium  of  elections,  we  find  the  judiciary,  on  every  occasion, 
still  driving  us  into  consolidation. 

"In  denying  the  right  they  usurp,  of  exclusively  explaining  the  constitution,  I  go 
further  than  you  do,  if  I  understand  rightly  your  quotation,  from  the  Federalist,  of  an 
opinion  that *  the  judiciary  is  the  last  resort,  in  relation  to  the  other  departments  of 
the  government,  but  not  in  relation  to  the  rights  of  the  parties  to  the  compact  under 
which  the  judiciary  is  derived.'  If  this  opinion  be  sound,  then,  indeed,  is  our  consti- 
tution a  complete  felo-de-se.  For,  intending  to  establish  three  departments,  coor- 
dinate and  independent,  that  they  might  check  and  balance  one  another,  it  has  given, 
according  to  this  opinion,  to  one  of  them  alone  the  right  to  prescribe  rules  for  the 
government  of  the  others,  and  to  that  one,  too,  which  is  unelected  by,  and  independ- 
ent of,  the  nation.  For  experience  has  already  shown  that  the  impeachment  it  has 
provided  is  not  even  a  scare-crow;  that  such  opinions  as  the  one  you  combat,  sent 
cautiously  out,  as  you  observe  also,  by  detachment,  —  not  belonging  to  the  case  often, 
but  sought  for  out  of  it,  as  if  to  rally  the  public  opinion  beforehand  to  their  views, 
and  to  indicate  the  line  they  are  to  walk  in,  —  have  been  so  quietly  passed  over  as  never 
to  have  excited  animadversion,  even  in  a  speech  of  any  one  of  the  body  intrusted  with 
impeachment.  The  constitution,  on  this  hypothesis,  is-  a  mere  thing  of  wax  in  the 
hands  of  the  judiciary,  which  they  may  twist  and  shape  into  any  form  they  please. 
It  should  be  remembered,  as  an  axiom  of  eternal  truth,  in  politics,  that  whatever 
power,  in  any  government,  is  independent,  is  absolute  also ;  in  theory  only,  at  first, 
while  the  spirit  of  the  people  is  up,  but  in  practice  as  fast  as  that  relaxes.  Independ- 
ence can  be  trusted  nowhere  but  with  the  people  in  mass.  They  are  inherently  inde- 
pendent of  all  but  moral  law.  My  construction  of  the  constitution  is  very  different 
from  that  you  quote.  It  is,  that  each  department  is  truly  independent  of  the  others, 
and  has  an  equal  right  to  decide  for  itself  what  is  the  meaning  of  the  constitution  in 
the  cases  submitted  to  its  action,  and  especially  where  it  is  to  act  ultimately,  and 
without  appeal." 

In  confirmation  of  this,  almost  every  eastern  constitution  author- 
izes the  departments  of  the  government,  not  judicial,  to  call  on  the 
judges  for  aid  and  advice  merely,  in  questions  of  difficulty;  still 
leaving  those  departments  to  act  finally  on  their  own  matured  inform- 
ation, and  their  own  responsibility.  But  all  the  difficulty  does  not 
arise  here.  Suppose  the  State  agents,  judicial  or  otherwise,  decide 
wrong  in  the  opinion  of  the  people,  or  the  agents  of  the  General  Gov- 
ernment decide  wrong  in  the  opinion  of  the  people,  on  subjects  admit- 
ted to  be  within  their  jurisdiction,  —  is  there,  first,  no  remedy  for  the 
people  1    Are  they  not  supreme  ? 

As  I  before  remarked,  the  people,  in  their  omnipotence,  if  the 
case  excite  them  enough,  can,  and  will,  in  such  event,  always  apply  a 
most  sovereign  remedy ;  —  sometimes  reach  the  disease  by  changing  the 
agents  who  have  misbehaved ;  at  other  times,  when  unable,  by  the  ten- 
ure of  office,  as  in  case  of  the  judges  generally,  to  reach  that  class  of 
agents  by  new  elections,  they  can,  by  conventions,  alter  or  abolish  their 
whole  system  of  government,  and  the  whole  course  of  decisions  under 
them,  and  improve  or  create  anew  whatever  may  have  been  objection- 
able. This  is  a  doctrine  neither  revolutionary  nor  leading  to  anarchy, 
but  rational  and  democratic,  and  lies  at  the  foundation  of  all  popular 
governments.  But  granting  this,  the  argument  still  holds  that,  though 
the  people  can  effect  a  change,  yet  the  States,  one  of  the  parties  to 
the  compact,  cannot  reach  or  correct  what  they  may  deem  an  erro- 
neous decision,  by  the  agents  of  the  other  party,  on  the  powers  given 
by  the  compact,  and  especially  that  they  cannot  reach  or  correct  an 


SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  99 

erroneous  decision  made  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  Union.  Again : 
it  may  be  answered,  reasoning  a  priori,  that  if  this  be  true,  it  is  deeply 
to  be  lamented,  as  the  people  seldom  act  unitedly  or  efficiently,  except 
through  their  State  agents  —  those  agents  who  come  so  frequently  and 
so  directly  from  among  the  people  themselves.  If  this  be  true,  it  is 
quite  certain  that  the  Supreme  Court  might,  if  so  disposed,  proceed, 
case  by  case,  from  year  to  year,  on  one  subject  and  another,  in  this 
and  that  section  of  the  Union,  to  give  constructions  to  the  constitution, 
tending  slowly,  but  inevitably,  to  a  consolidation  of  the  government,  and 
to  the  utter  prostration  of  State  rights ;  and  yet  the  people,  as  a  peo- 
ple, would  not  widely  and  at  once  become  enough  excited  to  interpose 
in  their  primary  authority,  and  stay  or  correct  such  encroachments. 
If  this  be  true,  any  Supreme  Court,  entertaining  political  views  hostile 
to  those  of  a  majority  of  the  people,  would  be  able,  in  time,  by  cautious 
approaches,  not  exciting  general  and  deep  alarm,  to  defeat  the  majority, 
to  render  the  reservations  to  the  States  and  people  a  mere  brutum 
fulmen,  turn  the  doctrine  of  State  rights  into  a  jest,  and  ride  tri- 
umphantly over  all  probable  and  feasible  opposition. 

There  is  wanting  in  me  no  respect  to  the  members  of  our  Supreme 
Court,  which  their  great  personal  worth  deserves  ;  but  I  would  inquire 
if,  from  the  case  of  Marbury  and  Madison,  in  1801,  down  to  that  of 
the  Bank  and  McCulloch,  in  1821,  there  has  not  been  evinced  on  that 
bench  a  manifest  and  sleepless  opposition,  in  all  cases  of  a  political 
bearing,  to  the  strict  construction  of  the  constitution  adopted  by  the 
democracy  of  the  Union  in  the  great  revolution  of  1800?  I  say 
nothing  now  against  the  honesty  or  legal  correctness  of  their  views,  in 
adopting  such  a  construction.  I  speak  only  of  the  matter  of  fact,  and 
of  its  political  tendency ;  and  I  ask  if,  while  the  people,  through  their 
democratic  agents  in  the  Legislatures  of  the  State  and  General  Gov- 
ernments, have  been,  in  the  main,  adhering  to  one  construction,  —  a 
strict  and  rigid  construction, —  if  their  judicial  agents  in  the  General 
Government  have  not  been,  with  a  constancy  and  silence  like  the 
approaches  of  death,  adhering  to  a  different  construction ;  thus  sliding 
onwards  to  consolidation, —  thus  giving  a  diseased  enlargement  to  the 
powers  of  the  General  Government,  and  throwing  chains  over  State 
rights — chains  never  dreamed  of  at  the  formation  of  the  General 
Government?  What  says  Mr.  Jefferson  on  this  head?  (4  Jefferson's 
Works,  p.  337.) 

"  But  it  is  not  from  this  branch  of  government  we  have  most  to  fear.  Taxes  and 
short  elections  will  keep  them  right.  .  The  judiciary  of  the  United  States  is  the  subtle 
corps  of  sappers  and  miners  constantly  working  under  ground,  to  undermine  the 
foundations  of  our  confederated  fabric.  They  are  construing  our  constitution,  from  a 
coordination  of  a  general  and  special  government,  to  a  general  and  supreme  one 
alone.  This  will  lay  all  things  at  their  feet;  and  they  are  too  well  versed  in  English 
law  to  forget  the  maxim,  *  boni  judicis  est  ampliare  jurisdictionem.'  " 

No  institution,  in  this  free  country,  is  above  just  criticism  and  fair 
discussion,  in  regard  to  its  political  views,  and  the  political  consequences 


100  SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS. 

of  its  proceedings.  Hence,  in  the  States  and  everywhere,  the  field  of 
inquiry  and  comment  is,  and  should  be,  open  to  all ;  and  a  sacredness 
from  this  would  render  any  institution  a  despotism.  What,  then,  let 
me  ask, — what  have  been  the  illustrations  of  the  bearing  of  the  decisions 
of  that  court  upon  State  rights,  in  particular  cases  ?  At  one  time, 
has  not  Georgia  been  prostrated  by  a  decision,  in  a  case  feigned  or  real, 
between  Fletcher  and  Peck  1  At  another,  Pennsylvania  humbled,  in 
the  case  of  Olmstead's  executors  ?  At  another,  Ohio  and  Maryland 
subdued,  in  the  case  of  McCulloch  and  the  Bank  1  At  another,  New 
York  herself  set  at  defiance,  in  the  steamboat  controversy?  And  last, 
if  not  least,  New  Hampshire  vanquished,  in  the  case  of  Dartmouth 
College?  These  decisions  may,  or  may  not,  have  been  legally  right — 
that  is  not  my  present  inquiry ;  but  who  is  not  struck  with  the  differ- 
ence between  the  progress  and  effect  of  these  decisions,  and  what  was 
witnessed  in  the  earlier  days  of  the  republic  ?  When  Massachusetts, 
in  the  height  of  her  glory,  was  threatened  to  be  brought  to  the  bar  of 
that  court  for  trial,  she,  in  the  person  of  Hancock,  set  on  foot  a  remon- 
strance, and  a  proposed  amendment  of  the  constitution,  which  her  great 
influence  carried  throughout  the  Union, —  an  amendment  exempting  a 
sovereign  State  there,  in  certain  cases,  from  the  humiliation  of  a  trial 
and  sentence.  Even  this  amendment,  so  plausible  on  its  face,  has, 
since  1801,  been  almost  wholly  evaded  in  practice,  by  suing  the  agents 
of  a  State,  instead  of  the  State  itself.  So,  again,  before  1801,  when 
Virginia,  in  her  might  and  chivalry,  took  the  field  against  the  "alien 
and  sedition  laws,"  and  against  the  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  on 
their  constitutionality,  an  alteration  of  the  constitution,  to  be  sure,  did 
not  follow,  but  an  alteration  in  the  administration  and  the  laws  did  fol- 
low :  and  she  effected  the  political  revolution  which  suffered  those  laws 
to  expire  without  a  renewal,  and  will  probably  prevent  their  reenact- 
ment  until  democracy  itself  shall  have  become  a  forgotten  tale.  I 
shall  enumerate  no  other  cases,  nor  detain  the  Senate  by  a  moment's 
inquiry  into  the  correctness  of  any  of  these  decisions ;  though  it  may 
be  observed  that  my  own  State,  on  an  attempt  to  obtain  her  political 
approbation  of  the  decisions  in  the  cases  of  Ohio  and  Maryland,  and 
on  the  principles  therein  involved,  postponed  indefinitely  the  resolution 
on  that  subject,  by  the  following  vote  in  one  branch  of  her  Legisla- 
ture : 

June  24th,  1821,  the  Senate  voted,  seven  to  five,  to  postpone  indef- 
initely this,  among  others  : 

"Resolved,  That,  in  the  opinion  of  this  Legislature,  the  proceedings  in  the  Circuit 
Court  of  the  United  States  for  the  District  of  Ohio,  in  the  before-mentioned  report 
stated,  do  not  violate  either  the  letter  or  the  spirit  of  the  11th  article  of  the  amend- 
ments of  the  constitution  of  the  United  States,  nor  constitute  any  just  cause  of  com- 
plaint." 

The  only  time  she  ever  expressed  any  opinion,  as  a  State,  hostile  to 
my  views  concerning  the  powers  of  the  General  Government  and  its 


SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  101 

judiciary,  was  in  rejecting  the  Virginia  resolutions,  at  an  era  in  her 
politics  when,  having  just  cast  her  votes  for  the  elder  Adams,  she 
might  naturally  be  expected  to  be  hostile  to  the  democratic  principles 
of  those  resolutions. 

It  will  thus  be  seen  how  the  powers  of  the  General  Government  have 
been  gradually  brought,  through  one  of  its  departments,  to  bear  on  the 
States;  and  how  the  decisions  of  that  department  have  gradually 
tended  to  the  dangerous  enlargement  of  those  powers.  This  subject 
has  been  adverted  to,  not  for  the  purpose  of  questioning  the  constitu- 
tional competency  of  that  court  so  to  decide,  when  it  thinks  best,  but 
to  ask  whether  no  way  exists  for  the  States,  when  opposed  to  the  polit- 
ical bearing  of  those  constructions, —  when  opposed  to  such  a  political 
operation  of  the  constitution, —  to  check  or  control  the  influence  of 
such  a  course  of  decisions  :  and  if  any  way  does  not  exist,  whether  the 
government  is  not  likely  soon  to  end  in  consolidation,  and  whether  our 
future  Presidents  and  Vice-presidents,  without  reference  to  any  signs 
of  the  times  about  a  new  alliance,  are  not,  as  more  than  once  intimated 
in  this  discussion,  from  the  west  and  east  (Barton  and  Holmes),  to 
be  lifted  hereafter  from  that  bench  to  preside  over  the  new  destinies  of 
a  consolidated  government.  My  own  answer  to  some  of  these  inquiries 
is,  firstly,  that,  by  the  States,  as  States,  the  erroneous  decision  of  the 
legislative  and  executive  departments  of  the  General  Government  can 
generally  be  corrected  by  changing,  in  the  State  Legislatures  and  at  the 
ballot-boxes,  the  agents  here  who  made  those  decisions.  This  has  been 
the  ordinary  remedy,  in  ordinary  cases.  Another  class  of  decisions, 
and  especially  those  by  the  judiciary,  when  the  judges  are  not  remov- 
able by  the  people,  or  the  States,  or  Congress,  as  those  of  the  Supreme 
Court  are  not,  can  be  corrected  sometimes  by  the  States,  as  States, 
through  public  expressions  of  opinion  in  their  Legislatures,  acting  by 
their  intrinsic  reasoning  and  force  on  the  agents  who  made  those  decis- 
ions, and  inducing  them  to  revise  and  alter  their  doctrines  in  future. 
It  would  not  be  derogatory  to  any  court,  to  listen  to  any  expressions 
of  opinion,  and  any  arguments,  such  as  those  contained  in  the  Virginia 
resolutions  of  1798,  in  the  resolutions  of  South  Carolina  on  the  tariff, 
or  in  the  executive  message,  resolutions,  and  report,  of  the  Legislature 
of  New  Hampshire,  in  1822,  on  the  constructive  powers  claimed  for 
the  General  Government.  When  all  these  modes  fail,  another  and 
decisive  resort,  on  the  part  of  the  States,  is  to  amendments  of  the 
constitution,  by  the  safe  and  large  majority  of  three-fourths.  The 
acknowledged  power  of  the  States,  by  their  resolutions  and  concert  in 
this  way,  to  effect  any  changes,  limitations,  or  corrections,  shows 
clearly  that  in  them  the  real  sovereignty  between  the  two  governments 
is  placed  by  the  constitution,  and  in  them  the  final,  paramount  suprem- 
acy resides.  They  can  alter  this  constitution,  but  we  here  cannot 
alter  their  constitutions.  We,  then,  are  the  servants,  and  they  the, 
master.  On  the  contrary,  whatever  others  may  hold,  I  do  not  hold 
that  any  certain  redress  beyond  this,  on  the  part  of  any  State,  can  be 
9* 


102         SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS. 

interposed  against  such  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court  as  are  followed 
by  legal  process,  unless  that  State  resorts,  successfully,  to  force  against 
force,  in  conflict  with  the  federal  agents.  It  is  admitted  by  me,  how- 
ever, that  a  State  may  resolve,-^- may  express  her  convictions  on  the 
nullity  or  unconstitutionality  of  a  law  or  decision  of  the  General  Gov- 
ernment. These  doings  may  work  a  change  through  public  opinion, 
or  lead  to  a  cooperation  of  three-fourths  of  the  sister  States,  to  correct 
the  errors  by  amendments  of  the  constitution.  But  whenever  the 
enforcement  of  the  law  or  decision  comes  within  the  scope  of  the 
acknowledged  jurisdiction  of  the  Supreme  Court,  and  can  be  accom- 
plished by  legal  process,  I  see  no  way  in  which  that  court  can  be  con- 
trolled, except  by  moral  and  intellectual  appeals  to  the  hearts  and 
heads  of  her  judges,  or  by  amendments  to  the  constitution,  or  by  the 
deplorable  and  deprecated  remedy  of  physical  force.  This  latter  resort 
I  do  not  understand  any  gentleman  here  to  approve,  until  all  other 
resorts  fail ;  and,  even  then,  only  in  a  case  where  the  evil  suffered  is 
extreme  and  palpable,  and,  indeed,  more  intolerable  and  dangerous 
than  the  dissolution  of  the  government  itself. 

Such  was  the  doctrine  of  Jefferson  and  Madison.  (Virg.  Res., 
p.  18.) 

"The  resolution  has  accordingly  guarded  against  any  misapprehension  of  its 
object,  by  expressly  requiring  for  such  an  interposition  *  the  case  of  a  deliberate, 
palpable,  and  dangerous  '  breach  of  the  constitution,  by  the  exercise  of  powers  not 
granted  by  it.  It  must  be  a  case,  not  of  a  light  and  transient  nature,  but  of  a 
nature  dangerous  to  the  great  purposes  for  which  the  constitution  was  established. 
It  must  be  a  case,  moreover,  not  obscure  or  doubtful  in  its  construction,  but  plain 
and  palpable.  Lastly  :  it  must  be  a  case  not  resulting  from  a  partial  consideration 
or  hasty  determination,  but  a  case  stamped  with  a  final  consideration  and  deliberate 
adherence." 

Beyond  their  views  I  trust  no  member  of  this  Confederacy  will  ever 
feel  either  the  necessity  or  inclination  to  advance,  and  thus  put  in 
jeopardy  that  Union  which  we  all  profess  so  highly  to  prize.  Most  of 
the  States,  as  States,  in  most  of  the  exigencies  that  have  arisen  under 
the  constitution,  though  all  other  efforts  failed,  have  thought  it  better 
still  to  suffer  — 

"to  bear  the  ills  we  have, 
Than  fly  to  others  that  we  know  not  of." 

How  far  the  official  authorized  State  acts  under  Pennsylvania,  in 
the  case  of  Olmstead,  and  the  same  authorized  State  acts  in  Massachu- 
setts, in  withholding  the  militia  from  the  General  Government, —  and 
of  Massachusetts,  Connecticut,  and  Rhode  Island,  as  States,  assem- 
bling by  their  delegates  in  the  Hartford  Convention,  in  a  time  of  war, 
and  with  such  objects  as  the  late  chief  magistrate  imputed  to  them  in 
1828,  and  the  present  chief  magistrate  recognized  in  his  letter  to  Mr. 
Monroe  in  1816, — how  far  these  were  exceptions  from  their  history 
to  the  obedience  of  the  States,  as  States,  to  the  laws  and  constitution,  I 
see  not  now  any  pleasure,  or  profit,  or  necessity,  in  inquiring.     Every 


SURVEY   AND   SALE   OF   PUBLIC   LANDS.  103 

sovereign  State  who  has  decided,  or  who  may  decide,  on  forcible  col- 
lision, decides  for  herself,  though  she  manifestly  does  it  under  a  high 
responsibility  to  her  people  and  the  Union;  and,  of -course,  must  con- 
sent to  be  judged  upon,  however  harshly,  by  public  opinion,  and  be 
willing  to  abide  on  her  course  the  decision  made  by  the  scrutiny  of 
argument  and  time. 

Having  stated  some  of  my  deliberate  views  on  the  interest  of  the 
States  in  the  public  lands,  and  on  the  power  of  Congress  in  the  dis- 
posal of  them,  and  having  attempted  to  fortify  those  views  by  my 
opinions  on  the  just  construction  of  the  constitution,  as  regards  the 
power  of  Congress  to  appropriate  either  land  or  money,  I  have  next 
hastily  adverted  to  the  rights  of  the  States  and  the  people  to  control 
Congress  and  the  Federal  Judiciary,  when  disposed  to  place  a  con- 
struction on  those  powers  not  in  accordance  with  the  opinion  of  the 
States  and  the  people. 

Under  these  limitations  of  the  constitution,  as  expounded  by  the 
State  I  represent,  and  by  myself,  I  here  profess,  on  this  unpleasant 
controversy  between  parts  of  the  west  and  the  east,  that  I  am  willing 
to  go,  on  all  subjects  connected  with  the  public  lands,  into  equal  and 
useful  reform,  in  our  present  system  of  either  surveys  or  sales.  But, 
I  am  frank  to  confess,  I  have  uniformly  voted  against  appropriations 
for  general  surveys  for  roads  and  canals,  and  against  donations  of  land 
or  money  towards  roads  and  canals,  unless  so  far  as  our  express  con- 
tract requires,  in  relation  to  the  Cumberland  road  and  the  extension 
of  it;  or,  unless  the  roads  were  military,  or  situated  in  territories 
owned  by  the  United  States.  Other  gentlemen  have  doubtless  done 
the  same,  for  the  same  reasons,  whether  from  the  south  or  east ;  and 
it  is  a  mistake  evinced  by  our  own  records,  to  suppose  that  all,  or  even 
a  majority  of  the  east,  have  uniformly  gone  in  favor  of  these  objects. 
On  other  subjects,  the  case  may  be  very  different  in  respect  to  the 
vote  of  the  east  or  the  south,  arising  from  local  prejudices,  or  politi- 
cal opinions ;  but  on  that  question  enough  has  been  said  by  other  gen- 
tlemen, and  enough  shown  by  documents  and  records,  to  render  fur- 
ther comment  useless,  and  to  throw  some  additional  light  and  interest 
upon  the  political  and  party  history  of  this  country,  the  last  fifty 
years.  A  further  reason  for  refraining  upon  these  subjects  is,  that 
the  strictures  made  here,  unfavorable  to  the  east,  concerning  these 
subjects,  have  expressly,  repeatedly,  and  from  all  quarters,  excepted 
the  democracy  of  the  east ;  and  hence  I  see  no  occasion  for  myself,  as 
one  of  that  democracy,  to  enter  into  that  part  of  the  discussion,  for 
either  inquiry  or  vindication.  If  any  other  political  party  than  the 
democracy  in  the  east  has  been  attacked,  and  has  felt  aggrieved,  —  if 
the  peace  party  in  the  late  war  has  met  with  undue  severity, —  they, 
if  not  their  associates,  will  speak  for  themselves.  But  this  much  I 
will  add  on  the  graduation  bill  of  my  friend  from  Missouri  (Mr. 
Benton),  and  on  his  good  name:  I  cannot  agree  with  the  gentleman 
from  Maine  (Mr.  Holmes),  that  they  have  never  come  to  the  knowl- 


104  SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS. 

edge  of  my  constituents;  but,  on  the  contrary,  however  they  may 
doubt  the  expediency  of  parts  of  that  bill,  they  stand  ready  at  all 
times,  and  on  all  occasions,  so  far  as  that  democracy  is  represented  by 
me,  to  pay  due  homage  to  the  vigorous  intellect  of  its  author,  and  to 
his  indefatigable  and  faithful  services  on  this  floor,  not  only  to  the 
west,  but  to  the  country  at  large,  upon  almost  every  great  question 
agitated  here  since  my  personal  acquaintance  with  this  body.  What- 
ever others  in  the  east  may  profess,  I  do  not  contend  that  every 
western  measure,  whether  for  internal  improvement  or  different 
objects,  has  been  indebted  for  its  success  to  eastern  votes;  and  I 
appeal  to  no  alliances,  new  or  old,  in  confirmation  or  in  consequence 
of  it.  Nor  do  I  ask,  like  one  of  the  gentlemen  from  Maine  (Mr. 
S  Prague),  one  vote  against  the  west  to  be  judged  by  the  motive  and 
not  its  effects,  another  by  its  effects  and  not  the  motive,  —  one  by 
the  aid  received  of  a  minority  from  the  east  of  the  Hudson,  and 
another  by  a  minority  north-east  of  the  Potomac.  I,  for  one,  put 
forth  no  such  claims  or  arguments,  but  frankly  avow,  though  generally 
supporting  the  western  measures  before  named,  I  have,  in  other  cases, 
voted  against  the  west,  as  I  have  against  the  south,  the  Middle  States, 
and  the  east  itself.  But  I  have  done  it  on  principles  of  equal  right, 
of  general  justice,  and  devotion  to  my  official  oath;  and  on  no  princi- 
ples of  peculiar  favoritism  to  either,  except  as  I  might  know  better 
and  love  dearer  the  interests  and  welfare  of  my  immediate  constitu- 
ents. However  scoffed  for  hearing  New  England  blood  called  in 
question,  and  holding  silence,  I  claim  no  exemption  from  that  frailty 
of  predilection  towards  my  native  soil,  which,  if  frailty  it  be,  may  be 
thought  to  lean  on  virtue's  side. 

"  Breathes  there  a  man  with  soul  so  dead, 
Who  never  to  himself  hath  said, 
This  is  my  own,  my  native  land  ?" 

The  examination  which  has  accompanied  this  debate  will  not  show, 
I  believe,  that  the  west  has,  in  truth,  been  more  benefited  by  differ- 
ent constitutional  opinions  than  she  would  be  by  those  of  a  strict  and 
democratic  character.  All  the  political  kindnesses  which  can  be 
accorded  to  the  west,  on  these  last  principles  of  construction,  by  such 
of  the  democracy  of  the  east  as  entertain  them,  always  have  been,  and, 
I  am  confident,  always  will  be,  granted  with  cheerfulness.  Thus,  for 
one,  I  have  voted  for  improvement  of  her  lake  harbors  and  of  her 
navigable  rivers,  because  the  power  of  imposing  tonnage  duties  and 
imposts,  by  which  such  improvements  can  alone  be  generally  accom- 
plished, is  expressly  granted  to  Congress,  coupled  with  the  power  to 
regulate  commerce;  for  the  relief  of  her  actual  settlers  on  the 
public  lands,  many  of  whom  are  hardy  and  honest  emigrants  from  the 
east,  who,  flying  from  the  blasts  of  misfortune  there,  have  sought  an 
asylum  for  all  they  hold  dear  in  the  bosom  of  the  mighty  west ;  for 
the  extinguishment  of  Indian  titles,  because  we  too  have  once  had 


SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  105 

such  savage  neighbors,  and  often  seen  our  dwellings  in  a  blaze,  and 
our  wives  and  infants  perish,  under  their  bloody  and  barbarous  war- 
fare; for  remunerations  against  Indian  depredations,  because  those 
also  our  early  settlers  in  the  east  endured  frequently,  and  frequently 
beheld  in  a  single  night  the  total  wreck,  the  smoking  ruins,  of  years 
'  of  honest  and  patient  industry.  Lastly,  I  have  voted  for  military 
and  territorial  roads,  and  stand  ready  to  vote  for  lowering  the  prices 
of  the  public  lands.  But,  on  some  other  questions,  I  have  not  gone, 
and  cannot  go,  with  the  west,  any  more  than  they  can  always  go  with 
us.  In  fine,  whenever,  under  constitutional  limitations,  I  could  confer 
a  benefit  on  the  new  States,  I  have  heretofore  attempted,  and  will  in 
future  attempt  it,  as  heartily  as  to  confer  one  on  Pennsylvania  or 
South  Carolina ;  but  beyond  those  limitations  I  trust  that  no  honor- 
able statesman  from  beyond  the  mountains — and  I  know  that  none  of 
the  chivalry  there  who  fought  with  the  democracy  of  the  east  in  the  late 
war  for  free  trade  and  sailors'  rights  —  can,  for  a  moment,  wish  me  to 
go,  or  for  a  moment  can  question  the  sincerity  of  this  avowal  in  their 
behalf,  or  the  genuine  devotion  to  the  durable  welfare  of  the  west 
cherished  by  the  democracy  I  represent.  It  has  not  been  questioned, 
in  this  debate,  by  my  friend  on  the  right  or  the  left  (Mr.  Benton 
and  Mr.  Hayne),  but  both  have  eloquently  bestowed  on  that  democ- 
racy the  praises  it  richly  deserved,  and  which  praises  tend  to  bless 
both  the  giver  and  receiver.  That  democracy  has  the  ties,  the  sym- 
pathies, and  the  affections  of  the  heart,  arising  from  common  sufferings 
and  sacrifices,  besides  the  political  brotherhood  of  a  common  tongue, 
faith,  and  institutions,  to  bind  them  to  the  west  with  stronger  ties 
than  any  temporary  alliances,  for  purposes  whether  party  or  personal. 
Whether  the  same  ties  of  the  heart  can  exist  between  the  west  and 
the  opponents  of  that  democracy  in  the  east,  the  peace  party  in  war, 
who  refused  relief  and  succor  to  the  bleeding  west,  it  is  for  any 
representatives  of  those  opponents  to  show.  In  fine,  sir,  if  the  gov- 
ernment, on  those  principles  of  strict  construction  of  the  constitution, 
cannot  be  prosperously  administered,  it  requires  no  spirit  of  prophecy 
to  foresee,  that,  in  a  few  brief  years,  in  a  new  crisis  approaching, 
and  before  indicated,  it  must,  as  a  confederation,  probably  cease  to 
be  administered  at  all.  It  will,  in  my  judgment,  become  a  govern- 
ment of  usurped,  alarming,  undefined  powers ;  and  the  sacred  rights 
of  the  States  will  become  overshadowed  in  total  eclipse.  When  that 
catastrophe  more  nearly  approaches,  unless  the  great  parties  to  the 
government  shall  arouse  and  in  some  way  interfere  and  rescue  it  from 
consolidation,  it  will  follow,  as  darkness  does  the  day,  that  the 
government  ends  like  all  republics  of  olden  times,  either  in  anarchy 
or  despotism. 

On  some  accounts,  sir,  it  would  give  me  most  unfeigned  pleasure, 
could  I  close  my  remarks  here.  But,  for  an  adherence  to  what  I  con- 
sider democratic  doctrines,  on  these  and  other  points  of  controversy, 
and  for  an  adherence  to  such  men,  wherever  resident,  as  practise  those 


106  SURVEY   AND   SALE   OF   PUBLIC   LANDS. 

doctrines  through  evil  and  through  good  report,  it  has  been  the  lot  of 
a  class  of  people  in  the  east,  for  the  last  third  of  a  century,  to  be 
stigmatized  by  all  the  opprobrious  epithets  and  insinuations  which,  in 
different  stages  of  this  debate,  have  been  accumulated  on  such  of  them 
as  support  the  present  administration. 

On  one  hand  here,  these  last  have  been  alluded  to  as  if  mere  worship- 
pers of  a  rising  sun,  and  for  that  manufactured  into  democrats  dyed 
in  the  wool,  from  the  very  doors  of  the  Hartford  Convention.  On 
another  hand,  jeered  as  if  democratic  only  for  the  adherence  to  south- 
ern men,  and  taunted  as  being  small  in  number  and  diminutive  in 
importance.  On  another  hand,  stigmatized  as  Judases  and  apostates 
from  the  true  New  England  faith ;  and,  in  fine,  loudly  denounced, 
in  common  with  all  the  supporters  of  the  present  administration,  as 
a  heterogeneous  mass  of  renegadoes  from  all  parties,  with  no  common 
bond  of  principle  or  feeling,  and  doomed  soon  to  become  an  easy  con- 
quest to  the  courteous  and  the  modest  opponents  of  what  is  called 
this  cruel  administration.  Though  one  of  the  supporters  of  this 
administration,  still,  Mr.  President,  nothing  short  of  a  strong  sense  of 
peculiar  duty  on  this  occasion  could  have  compelled  me  to  take  any 
part  in  answering  such  angry  criminations.  They  seem  only  the 
escape  of  the  steam  from  a  high-pressure  engine,  fitted  for  an  eight 
years'  voyage ;  but  the  vessel  having  unexpectedly  been  compelled  to 
stop  its  wheels  at  the  end  of  four  years,  thus  lets  off  its  heated  vapor 
in  the  midst  of  its  career.  I  consider  the  debate,  however,  in  this 
respect,  if  in  no  other,  as  somewhat  fortunate,  since  it  may  prevent 
any  injury  by  the  bursting  of  the  boilers.  But,  sir,  averse  as  I  am 
to  party  bitterness,  —  and  the  whole  Senate  can  bear  me  witness  that, 
unless  in  self-defence,  I  never  make  either  sectional,  party,  or  per- 
sonal imputations,  - — and  little  regardful  as  I  am  of  abuse,  when  heaped 
only  on  myself, — for  I  have  long  since  learned  to  let  my  life,  rather 
than  my  language,  answer  personal  slander,  —  yet  I  stand  in  such  a 
relation  to  those  friends  of  this  administration,  in  my  own  State,  as  to 
render  it  unmanly  and  dishonorable  to  permit  any  imputations  on 
them,  from  however  high  sources,  to  pass  unnoticed.  Much  less  will 
I  permit  them  so  to  pass,  when  showered  upon  us  chiefly,  not  by  the 
south,  or  the  west,  or  the  Middle  States,  but  by  persons  some  of 
whom  claim  to  be  the  only  lineal  sons  of  the  east  itself,  and  the 
real  Simon  Pures  of  all  that  is  democratic,  and  all  that  is  New  Eng- 
land; persons,  also,  who  vauntingly  march  to  the  attack  here,  with 
eleven  thence  against  the  administration  to  one  in  its  favor,  willing  to 
repel  the  aggression,  and  sustain  the  cause  of  its  eastern  supporters. 
But  this,  I  suppose,  is  another  specimen  of  that  magnanimity  and  true 
greatness  which,  when  in  a  minority,  always  talks  of  lifting  its  quad- 
rant to  the  sun,  and  of  forgetting  and  forgiving  by-gone  sfrifes,  by- 
gone parties,  by-gone  oppositions;  but  which,  in  a  majority,  directs 
its  vision  and  its  wrath  to  the  smallest  light  that  twinkles.  Let  me  ask, 
then,  more  in  sorrow  than  in  anger,  why  are  these  aggressions 


SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  107 

made  on  us,  Mr.  President  1  Have  any  provocations  been  given  for 
an  attack  by  eastern  men  on  that  part  of  the  democracy  of  the  east 
which  supports  the  present  administration?  Had  a  syllable  been 
uttered  here,  by  any  of  that  democracy,  against  any  of  their  former 
brethren,  whether  or  not  intimating  they  were  now  in  other  ranks,  or 
in  other  alliances'?  Had  aught  been  said  from  the  east  reproaching 
any  of  them  as  Swiss  troops,  coming  from  or  going  to  the  peace  party 
in  war  1  On  the  contrary,  not  only  the  eastern  friends  of  this  admin- 
istration, but  the  whole  democratic  party  in  the  east,  whether  oppos- 
ers  or  supporters  of  this  administration,  had  been  studiously,  in  the 
whole  charge,  excepted  from  any  censure  flung  by  any  gentleman  on 
the  east  itself,  or  on  the  excesses  of  its  federalism,  during  the  late  war. 
Thus  my  friend  on  the  left  (Mr.  Benton)  explicitly  said,  he  flung 
no  reproach  or  complaint  on  the  eastern  democracy ;  and  we  have  the 
printed  as  well  as  spoken  declarations  of  my  friend  on  the  right  (Mr. 
Hayne)  to  the  same  effect,  and  in  a  strain  of  the  highest,  if  not  most 
merited  eulogy.     He  said : 

"  God  forbid,  sir,  that  he  should  charge  the  people  of  Massachusetts  with  partici- 
pating in  these  sentiments.  The  south  and  the  west  had  then  their  friends,  —  men 
who  stood  by  their  country,  though  encompassed  all  around  by  their  enemies  :  the 
senator  from  Massachusetts  (Mr.  Silsbee)  was  one  of  them  ;  the  senator  from  Con- 
necticut (Mr.  Foot)  was  another  ;  and  there  were  others  now  on  this  floor.  The  sen- 
timents I  have  read  were  the  sentiments  of  a  party,  embracing  the  political  associates 
of  the  gentleman  from  Massachusetts  (Mr.  Webster)." 

Again :  to  exempt,  with  specific  certainty,  the  democratic  party  at 
large,  as  well  as  the  people  of  Massachusetts  not  in  concert  with  the 
peace  party,  he  (Mr.  Hayne)  said : 

"  Mr.  President :  I  wish  it  to  be  distinctly  understood,  that  all  the  remarks  I  have 
made  on  this  subject  are  intended  to  be  exclusively  applied  to  a  party,  which  I 
have  described  as  the  *  Peace  party  of  New  England,'  embracing  the  political  asso- 
ciates of  the  senator  from  Massachusetts, —  a  party  which  controlled  the  operations  of 
that  State  during  the  embargo  and  war,  and  who  are  justly  chargeable  with  all  the 
measures  I  have  justly  reprobated.  Sir,  nothing  has  been  further  from  my  thoughts 
than  to  impeach  the  character  or  conduct  of  the  people  of  New  England.  For  their 
steady  habits,  and  hardy  virtues,  I  trust  I  entertain  a  becoming  respect.  I  fully  sub- 
scribe to  the  truth  of  the  description  (given  before  the  Revolution,  by  one  whose  praise 
is  the  highest  eulogy),  'that  the  perseverance  of  Holland,  the  activity  of  France,  and 
the  dexterous  and  firm  sagac ity  of  English  enterprise,'  have  been  more  than  equalled 
by  this  'recent  people.'  Hardy,  enterprising,  sagacious,  industrious  and  moral,  the 
people  of  New  England,  of  the  present  day,  are  worthy  of  their  ancestors.  Still  less, 
Mr.  President,  has  it  been  my  intention  to  say  anything  that  could  be  construed  into 
a  want  of  respect  for  that  party,  who,  trampling  on  all  narrow,  sectional  feelings, 
have  been  true  to  their  principles  in  the  worst  of  times, —  I  mean  the  democracy  of  New 
England.  Sir,  I  will  declare  that,  highly  as  I  appreciate  the  democracy  of  the  south, 
I  consider  even  higher  praise  to  be  due  to  the  democracy  of  New  England,  who  have 
maintained  their  principles  '  through  good  and  through  evil  report,'  —  who,  at  every 
period  of  our  national  history,  have  stood  up  manfully  for  '  their  country,  their  whole 
country,  and  nothing  but  their  country.'  In  the  great  political  revolution  of  '98, 
they  were  found  united  with  the  democracy  of  the  south,  marching  under  the  banner 
of  the  constitution,  led  on  by  the  patriarch  of  liberty,  in  search  of  the  land  of  politi- 
cal promise,  which  they  lived  not  only  to  behold,  but  to  possess  and  to  enjoy.  Again, 
sir,  in  the  darkest  and  gloomiest  period  of  the  war,  when  our  country  stood  single- 


108  SUKVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS. 

handed  against  *  the  conqueror  of  the  conquerors  of  the  world,'  —  when  all  about  and 
around  them  was  dark  and  dreary,  disastrous  and  discouraging, —  they  stood,  a  Spar- 
tan band,  in  that  narrow  pass  where  the  honor  of  their  country  was  to  be  defended, 
or  to  find  its  grave.  And  in  the  last  great  struggle,  involving,  as  we  believe,  the 
very  existence  of  the  principle  of  popular  sovereignty,  where  were  the  democracy  of 
New  England  ?  Where  they  always  have  been  found,  sir,  struggling  side  by  side 
with  their  brethren  of  the  south  and  the  west  for  popular  rights,  and  assisting  in  that 
glorious  triumph  by  which  the  man  of  the  people  was  elevated  to  the  highest  office  in 
their  gift." 

Thus  has  he  so  ably  and  eloquently  poured  upon  our  democracy 
every  commendation  they  deserve,  and  for  which  he  is  entitled  to  most 
grateful  thanks,  both  from  them  and  myself;  and  thus  the  naked  truth 
puts  to  rest  the  attempts  since  made  to  pervert  his  remarks  into  a  sec- 
tional attack  on  the  whole  east,  and  to  excite  improper  and  unfounded 
prejudice  against  the  south  and  west,  as  if  they  had  put  "  the  whole 
east  to  the  ban  of  the  empire" 

But,  in  truth,  the  sectional  attempts  to  inflame  public  sentiment 
will  appear  to  have  come  from  the  east  itself,  if  not  from  some  of  that 
party  there  which  alone  was  censured ;  and  the  injunctions  of  Wash- 
ington against  such  sectional  appeals,  which  have  been  read  us,  might 
well  furnish  admonitions  against  the  course  pursued  by  those  on  my 
right,  who  have  read  them  (Mr.  Noble  and  Mr.  Holmes). 

"  One  of  the  expedients  of  party  to  acquire  influence  within  particular  districts  is 
to  misrepresent  the  opinions  and  aims  of  other  districts.  You  cannot  shield  your- 
selves too  much  against  the  jealousies  and  heart-burnings  which  spring  from  those 
misrepresentations  ;  they  tend  to  render  alien  to  each  other  those  who  ought  to  be 
bound  together  by  fraternal  affection."  —  5  Marshall's  Wash.,  300. 

With  a  charge,  then,  against  only  the  leaders  of  the  peace  party  in 
war,  what  have  we  seen  in  reply  1  Not  an  avowed  defence  of  that 
party  which  alone  was  assailed,  and  which,  by  its  representation  here, 
commenced  the  assault  on  my  friend  upon  the  right,  by  taunts  against 
the  south ;  but  we  have  invocations  to  forgetfulness,  we  have  protest- 
ations and  disclaimers.  Not  the  lions  of  democracy  rousing  when  not 
attacked ;  but  the  real  game  pursued  rousing  as  it  feels  the  huntsman 
in  the  chase,  and  seeking  to  infuse  alarm  into  all  within  its  influence, 
and  all  starting  aside,  from  anger  or  mortification,  that  the  democ- 
racy was  not  also  attacked,  to  fasten  upon  our  throats,  with  all  the 
bitterness  of  our  most  virulent  defamers,  for  the  last  third  of  a 
century. 

I  cherish,  sir,  quite  too  much  self-respect,  and  too  great  personal 
regard  for  that  portion  of  the  federalism  of  this  Union  which  has 
been  honest,  consistent  and  faithful  to  the  country,  however  much  we 
may  differ  in  our  political  views,  ever  to  cast  on  any  of  its  number 
personal  or  party  strictures,  beyond  what  is  necessarily  involved  in 
settling  historical  facts,  and  in  defence  of  myself  and  my  constituents. 
But  I  shall  endeavor,  with  all  the  decorum  so  exciting  a  subject  per- 
mits, to  show,  if  God  spares  me  strength,  that  the  imputations  before 
enumerated,  come  whence  they  may,  are  the  worst  kind  of  revilings, 


SURVEY  VND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  109 

from  a  very  ancient  school  of  politics  in  the  east ;  and  that  they  are 
just  as  unfounded  now,  as  the  atrocious  slanders  were,  which  have 
been  uttered  by  heated  partisans  against  this  same  democracy,  in  every 
great  political  struggle  for  the  last  thirty  years.  It  matters  not  who 
utters  them,  —  whether  some  of  the  authors  have  always  claimed  to 
support  republicanism,  as  opposed  to  federalism,  or  some  have  never 
so  claimed,  —  or  whether  some  of  them,  during  the  whole  administra- 
tion of  the  writer  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  marched  together, 
shoulder  to  shoulder,  in  opposition  to  that  administration,  as  they  now 
march  in  opposition  to  this,  or  not.  But  the  scoffs  themselves  have 
internal  evidence  of  their  character,  which  no  professions  can  rebut ; 
they  smell  of  a  lamp,  they  spring  from  a  school,  not  to  be  mistaken. 
Whoever  unites  in  these  scoffs  cannot  complain,  if  judged  by  the 
maxim,  noscitur  a  sociis.  They  are  the  old  lessons  of  an  old  school. 
The  stain  and  brand  can  no  more  be  torn  off,  than  Hercules  could  tear 
off  the  poisoned  robe  of  Nessus. 

Under  the  lead,  then,  which  all  have  witnessed,  that  part  of  the 
democracy  of  the  east  friendly  to  the  present  administration  have  first 
been  kindly  reminded  that  they  are  a  new  manufacture ;  and  next,  that 
their  democracy  chiefly  consists  in  their  adherence  to  southern  men  and 
southern  measures.  How  novel  and  how  true  are  these  taunts,  will  be 
seen  in  a  moment,  by  "  setting  history  right." 

Had  gentlemen  forgotten  that  the  seeds  of  division  were  sown  in  the 
east  early  as  1791,  and  that  whoever  then  rose  above  sectional  views, 
and  pursued  an  independent  and  democratic  course  on  public  measures, 
was  jeered  at  by  some,  in  the  language  once  applied  to  Hancock,  — he 
"is  with  the  Yorkers  and  Southern  bashaws "  1  Repeated  from  the 
same  quarter  in  1798,  against  the  intrepid  Langdon, — that  he  was 
" a  slave,  an  apostate  to  the  south;"  because  he  was  averse  to  the 
principles  and  policy  of  the  then  administration,  and  rose  against  it, 
and  above  sectional  clamor  and  Massachusetts  dictation,  supposing 
that  New  Hampshire  "was,  and  of  right  ought  to  be,"  as  independ- 
ent of  her,  as  of  Georgia  or  Kentucky,  and  that  any  other  course  by 
her  delegates  here  would  indeed  be  apostasy,  —  degrading  apostasy 
from  democratic  principles,  and  all  those  holy  and  inspiring  sentiments 
of  pride  and  patriotism  which  ought  to  govern  a  free  and  sovereign 
State,  and  any  delegates  worthy  of  a  free  and  sovereign  State.  Echoed 
again,  in  1808,  against  the  last  President,  when  professing  democracy, 
and  moulded  into  every  variety  of  bitterness,  — and,  perad venture,  from 
some  of  the  same  lips  now  repeating  the  sarcasms  against  us,  — that  he 
was  seduced  by  the  south,  and  was  a  Judas  and  traitor  to  New 
England,  because  he  denounced  what  he  called  "  narrow"  and  "  sec- 
tional" schemes  in  the  east,  tending  to  disunion  and  treason.  Reech- 
oed, in  1812,  against  one  of  your  distinguished  predecessors  in  that 
chair,  the  revolutionary  veteran  Gerry,  and  many  others  in  favor  of 
that  war,  by  stigmatizing  them  as  "white  slaves  of  the  south;"  because, 
in  a  crisis  of  great  perplexity  and  peril,  they  stood  by  their  brethren 
10 


110  SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS, 

of  the  south,  the  Middle  States,  and  the  west,  in  attempts  to  vindicate 
our  country's  rights,  and  "pluck  up  drowning  honor  by  the  locks," 
rather  than  standing  by  the  mere  leaders  of  a  party  in  the  east,  who 
cried  out  then,  as  now,  that  the  whole  of  New  England  was  put  to 
the  ban  of  the  empire. 

Few  can  be  ignorant  how  often,  within  the  last  four  years,  the  same 
kind  of  taunts  has  been  reiterated  against  all  those  who,  in  the  late 
presidential  canvass  at  the  east,  supported  the  present  executive. 
Coming  this  very  morning,  and  in  my  hand,  in  a  paper  now  under  the 
banner  of  National  Republicanism,  but  during  that  war  under  the 
five-striped  flag,  is  the  very  repetition,  for  the  ten-thousandth  time,  of 
one  of  these  same  groundless  scoffs : 

"  If  New  Hampshire  chooses  to  send  Representatives  who  can  thus  desert  the  best 
interests  of  their  constituents,  and  become  the  white  slaves  of  the  South,  she  must 
blame  herself." 

The  ear-mark  of  this  attack  on  a  part  of  my  constituents  is,  there- 
fore, too  large  and  long,  not  to  show  at  once  its  true  origin  and  char- 
acter, and  to  prove  anew  how  much  easier  it  is  to  alter  names  than 
things. 

The  inconsistency  of  these  sneers,  from  such  quarters,  will  also  be 
apparent,  when  we  set  our  history  right,  by  finding  that  these  same 
authors  of  them  have  voted  for  southern  candidates  nearly  if  not  quite 
as  often  as  the  democrats,  and  always  when  their  party  success  could 
be  promoted  by  it;  because,  omitting  1789  and  1793,  when  all  united 
for  a  southern  man,  they  appear  to  have  voted  for  one  as  President  in 
1804,  1808,  1816,  and  1820. 

The  smallness  of  the  number,  and  the  diminutive  importance,  of  the 
supporters  of  this  administration  in  the  east,  constitute  another  mag- 
nanimous taunt  from  the  same  source,  against  the  genuineness  of  their 
democracy ;  as  if,  when  history  is  set  right,  the  present  executive  did 
not  obtain  more  votes  in  New  England  than  did  Mr.  Jefferson  in  1800, 
and,  with  the  exception  of  one  State,  more  than  Mr.  Madison  did  in 
1812.  We  are  accustomed,  in  the  east,  sir,  to  new  trials  for  correct- 
ing mistakes.  New  Hampshire,  as  a  State,  since  the  late  election, 
has  already  changed  her  delegation  in  the  other  House,  so  as  to  be 
entirely  in  favor  of  this  administration.  And  has  not  Maine  herself, 
beside  an  electoral  vote  for  it,  sent  an  equal  number  there  in  its  sup- 
port ?  On  this,  I  think,  her  democrats  have  some  little  claim  to  respect, 
in  point  of  numbers,  however  charged  with  apostasy ;  and  I  may  be 
pardoned  in  the  guess,  that,  from  the  signs  of  the  times  there,  they 
will  at  least  try  to  show  a  majority  in  favor  of  this  administration, 
sooner  than  the  present  delegation  from  Maine  here  shall  succeed  in 
obtaining  all  the  Maine  and  Massachusetts  claims  for  the  misconduct 
of  their  peace  party  in  the  late  war. 

The  resemblance  between  the  political  character  of  the  opposition 
and  administration  parties  in  1798,  1812,  and  1828,  would  seem  to 


SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  Ill 

give  us  some  further  title  to  old-fashioned  democracy.  The  same  dem- 
ocratic States,  with  one  or  two  exceptions  only,  are  found  at  each  era, 
side  by  side,  in  favor  of  Jefferson,  Madison,  and  the  hero  of  Orleans. 
On  one  side,  Virginia  and  Pennsylvania,  Carolina  and  Georgia,  Ten- 
nessee and  Kentucky ;  —  on  the  other,  Delaware  and  Massachusetts, 
Connecticut,  and  divided  Maryland.  The  same  distinguished  states- 
men of  the  first  era,  who  survive,  and  who  were  honored  by  every 
species  of  abuse,  from  the  most  malignant  of  their  enemies,  —  those 
republican  statesmen  of  1798,  the  Livingstons,  the  Macons,  the  Smiths, 
the  Randolphs,  and  the  Gileses, — are  again  found  acting  and  stigmatized 
with  the  humble  democrats  of  the  east,  who  support  the  present  admin- 
istration. Yes,  sir,  when  that  gentleman  (Mr.  Livingston),  little 
more  than  a  year  since,  —  not  in  old  "  by-gone  days"  of  virulence, — 
was  defeated  in  an  election  to  the  other  House,  one  of  the  first  papers 
at  the  "  head-quarters  of  good  principles"  that  hoisted  the  new  banner 
of  National  Republicanism  exulted  that  he  "was  consigned  to  the 
tomb  of  all  the  Capulets;"  and  further  added,  "  When  we  recollect  that 
Mr.  Livingston  is  an  old  sinner,  and  that  we  are  inflicting  punishment 
for  the  back-sliding  of  thirty  years,  we  may  safely  say  he  falls  unwept, 
unhonored." 

Little  did  they  then  expect  his  Anteean  vigor,  in  rising  from  that  fall, 
would  so  soon  restore  him  to  the  councils  of  his  country,  as  the  repre- 
sentative of  a  sovereign  State,  rather  than  of  a  single  district.  And 
little  did  they  heed,  as  in  "by-gone  days,"  the  base  injustice  they 
were  perpetrating  towards  one,  of  whom  it  is  no  flattery  to  say,  he 
is  as  a  civilian,  no  less  than  a  politician,  an  ornament  both  to  that 
State  and  his  country,  if  not  to  our  race.  Accessions  have,  of  course, 
been  made  from  other  ranks,  to  swell  the  increased  majority  of  1828 
over  those  of  1800  and  1812 ;  but  they  have  been,  I  trust,  accessions 
of  principle,  and  not  of  bargain ;  and  if  such  accessions,  then  they 
will  endure,  flourish  and  bear  good  fruit,  long  as  the  original  stock 
upon  which  they  have  been  engrafted.  But  if  they  have  not  been 
from  principle,  who  regrets  how  soon  they  may  be  severed  from  the 
stock  1 

Whether  the  same  doctrines,  in  the  main,  are  also  not  now  advocated 
by  us  and  by  the  opposition,  as  were  advocated  by  the  administration 
of  1801  and  by  its  opposition,  is  of  too  common  notoriety,  and  has 
been  too  fully  shown,  in  the  progress  of  this  debate,  to  need  much  fur- 
ther illustration.  On  the  part  of  the  administration,  abused  as  it  has 
been,  —  or,  at  least,  on  the  part  of  its  supporters  in  the  east,  whose 
claims  to  democracy  have  been  so  modestly  challenged, —  I  venture  with 
frankness  to  assert,  that  there  is,  in  general,  the  same  adherence  to  a 
strict  construction  of  the  constitution,  and  to  the  reserved  rights  and 
sovereignties  of  the  States,  as  under  Jefferson ;  the  same  acquiescence 
in  instructions  by  State  Legislatures ;  the  same  desire  for  reform  and 
economy;  the  same  abhorrence  of  implied  and  doubtful  powers, 
whether  over  the  press,  the  deliberations  of  this  body,  or  the  industry 


112  SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS. 

and  free  trade  of  the  country.  On  the  contrary,  on  the  part  of  the 
opposition,  there  are,  and  have  been,  the  same  scoffs  at  reform  and 
economy ;  the  same  denial  of  the  right  of  instruction  in  the  States 
to  their  senators ;  the  same  struggle  for  enlarged  constructions  of 
the  constitution;  a  refusal  "to  be  palsied  by  the  "will  of  our  constit- 
uents ;  "  implied  powers  carried  to  the  greatest  extent,  in  assuming 
to  accept,  in  the  recess,  invitations  to  Panama,  and  in  claiming  the 
right,  in  that  recess,  without  the  consent  of  the  Senate,  to  appoint 
ministers  on  such  an  expensive  and  hazardous  mission ;  and,  finally, 
certain  movements  of  a  "specific"  character,  bearing  on  the  press, 
not  quite  in  coincidence  with  a  bill  introduced  here,  the  same  day,  by 
my  friend  from  New  Jersey  (Mr.  Dickerson),  to  refund  a  fine  col- 
lected under  the  sedition  law  of  1798. 

This  attitude  of  a  party  now  in  a  majority,  disclaiming  implied  and 
enlarged  powers  in  the  legislative  as  well  as  the  executive  branches,  is 
a  most  cheering  sign  of  the  times  for  the  safety  of  our  liberties,  and 
is  an  attitude  worthy  imitation  in  all  governments,  especially  by  all 
republican  magistrates,  in  all  future  times.  I  say  nothing  against  the 
past  administration  as  men,  for  some  of  them  possess  my  entire  respect; 
but  I  am  speaking  of  some  of  the  political  measures  they,  or  their 
friends,  have  proposed  and  approved.  If  any  part  of  the  democracy 
of  the  east,  friendly  to  this  administration,  were  once  in  favor  of  the 
late  chief  magistrate,  and  sincerely  intended  to  support  his  adminis- 
tration, because,  as  they  believed,  he  had  become  united  with  that 
democracy  and  inclined  to  enforce  its  principles,  —  and  many  of  them 
honestly  did  so  intend  and  believe;  —  if  any  of  them,  in  " by-gone 
years,"  vindicated  him  against  attacks  from  the  same  political  school 
whence  we  ourselves  are  now  assailed,  and,  like  the  present  President, 
in  the  letters  here  cited  against  him,  to  Mr.  Monroe,  did  think  well 
of  the  talents  and  patriotism  of  that  chief  magistrate,  the  world  will 
see,  when  the  history  of  the  east  is  set  right,  where,  and  on  what 
side,  has  been  any  change  of  principle. 

They  will  see  whether  the  treachery  and  apostasy  so  often  insinu- 
ated here  and  elsewhere,  and  formerly  applied  by  the  same  political 
school,  in  the  same  way,  to  that  very  chief  magistrate,  do  not  now,  if 
applicable  at  all,  if  courteous  and  just  to  anybody,  more  properly 
apply  to  the  course  of  that  magistrate,  and  of  his  administration,  than 
to  those  democrats  in  the  east  who  continued  faithfully  to  cling  to  the 
platform  of  democratic  principles.  What  verdict,  on  this  point,  have 
all  the  democratic  States  in  the  Union,  standing  together  in  1798, 
1812,  and  in  1828,  almost  unanimously  returned?  Is  it  not  that  the 
past  administration,  in  many  respects,  departed  from  the  principles  of 
democracy  ?  And  what  verdict  has  New  Hampshire  herself,  within  the 
last  year,  returned  :  —  that  those  who  were  sent  hither  by  democratic 
votes,  and  to  defend  democratic  principles,  and  who  abided  by  those 
principles,  to  the  hazard  of  both  popularity  and  office,  — that  they  were 
faithful  among  the  faithless,  and  their  course  to  be  approved  ?  or  that 


SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  113 

the  desertion,  if  it  existed  at  all,  was  on  the  side  of  that  part  of  her 
delegation  in  the  other  House,  who,  for  adhering  to  all  men  and 
measures  indiscriminately  of  that  administration,  have  been  permitted 
to  retire  to  private  life  ? 

One  only  of  that  delegation  —  a  man  whose  stern  democracy  never 
quailed  or  bent  to  any  fellow-man  —  has,  for  that,  been  borne  back 
here  triumphantly  by  the  suffrages  of  the  people ;  proving  again,  what 
is  and  always  should  be  a  proud  excellence  in  a  free  government,  that, 
however  the  waves  of  faction  or  sectional  prejudice  may,  for  a  time; 
dash  against  a  consistent  and  faithful  representative, 

"  An  honest  man  is  still  an  unmoved  rock, 
Washed  whiter,  but  not  shaken,  by  the  shock." 

Gentlemen  know  but  little  of  that  democracy,  if  they  suppose  their 
object  is  to  go  themselves,  or  to  have  their  representatives  go,  for  mere 
men  rather  than  measures :  that  they  are  slaves  enough,  or  ever  have 
been,  or  ever  will  be,  to  bend  the  servile  knee  to  any  "  lord  or  master" 
but  the  supreme  Lord  of  all ;  or  to  acknowledge  any  such  in  office  as 
intimated,  except  their  constituents  and  their  State.  You  do  them 
foul  injustice  and  reproach,  if  you  believe  that  democracy  has  not  the 
justice  and  patriotism  to  uphold  those  who  uphold  their  country ;  and 
if  ever  misled,  for  a  time,  by  local  prejudice  or  personal  regard,  that 
they  will  ever  long  go  for  men,  unless  those  men  go  for  their  cause, — 
ever  long  go  for  any  slavish  and  monarchical  doctrine  of  unlimited 
devotion  to  particular  individuals,  or  particular  dynasties.  These 
principles,  I  am  proud  and  thankful  for  the  opportunity  to  say,  in 
behalf  of  my  faithful  constituents, — whose  attachment,  when  I  forget, 
may  my  God  forget  me !  —  these  principles  belong  to  that  part  of  the 
New  Hampshire  democracy  which  supports  this  calumniated  adminis- 
tration. But  whether  they  are  the  principles  of  that  kind  of  National 
Republicanism,  in  Maine  and  Massachusetts,  which  opposes  this 
administration,  the  world  has  enjoyed  an  opportunity  of  judging  in  the 
course  of  this  debate. 

The  country  will  thus  be  able  to  set  right  the  history  of  the  east  in 
the  late  presidential  canvass ;  and  I  repeat,  that  it  is  only  in  self- 
defence,  and  in  vindication  of  a  large  portion  of  my  constituents  and 
myself,  thus  attacked  on  this  floor,  for  their  want  of  real  democracy, 
in  supporting  the  present  administration,  that  I  could  have  overcome 
my  repugnance,  in  this  assembly,  to  make  any  allusions  to  those  fierce 
party  struggles  that  have  so  often  raged  among  the  modern  Spartans 
and  Athenians  of  the  rocky  east. 

My  mind  is  recalled  to  one  other  direction  given,  in  this  debate,  to 
the  history,  merits,  and  glories  of  the  east,  entirely  at  war  with  the 
real  worth  of  that  democracy. 

Yielding,  as  I  cheerfully  do,  and  always  shall,  due  praise  to  politi- 
cal opponents,  yet  I  can  never  consent  that  all  the  excellences  and 
applause  bestowed  on  the  east  by  gentlemen  from  that  or  other  regions, 
10* 


114  SURVEY   AND   SALE   OF   PUBLIC   LANDS. 

shall  at  once  be  assumed  and  appropriated,  as  if  exclusively  belonging 
to  the  opponents  of  that  vilified  democracy, —  to  the  peace  party  in 
war.  Thus  we  see  that,  when  nobody  has  been  attacked  from  any 
other  quarter  except  those  opponents,  every  change  of  eulogy  has  been 
rung  in  reply,  as  if  the  eulogy  was  all  deserved,  all  won,  and  all  to  be 
monopolized,  by  only  those  who  were  attacked, —  by  only  those  oppo- 
nents. Little  did  my  friend  from  South  Carolina  (Mr.  Hayne) 
think  his  prophecy  would  so  soon  be  apparently  verified,  when  he  spoke 
of  what  might  be  done  by  some  future  biographer  of  one  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Hartford  Convention.  "I  doubt  not,"  said  he,  "it  will 
be  found  quite  easy  to  prove  that  the  peace  party  in  Massachusetts 
were  the  only  defenders  of  their  country  during  the  war,  and  actually 
achieved  our  victories  by  land  and  sea."  Have  gentlemen  not  been 
pursuing  here  a  constant  course  of  argument  tending,  in  fact,  what- 
ever may  have  been  the  intent,  to  something  very  like  a  confirmation 
of  this  prediction  ? 

Thus,  when  members  of  the  Hartford  Convention  are  assailed,  there 
is,  in  reply,  a  flourish  of  trumpet  after  trumpet  in  defence  of  those 
who  stood  by  the  country,  and  who,  in  fact,  resisted  that  convention, 
and  denounced,  as  loudly  as  has  been  denounced  here,  its  leaders  and 
its  doctrines, —  thus  creating  an  impression  that  that  convention  stood 
by  their  country,  or  that  those  who  resisted  that  convention  had  been 
assailed.  Is  this  course  of  reply  one  of  the  means  referred  to  by 
Washington  for  converting  any  party  charge  or  excitement  into  a 
sectional  shape?  Thus,  again,  if  schemes  for  disunion,  and  for  a 
northern  confederacy,  are  charged  home  upon  the  leaders  of  a  party 
in  the  east,  before  the  Hartford  Convention,  and  before  the  embargo, 
on  the  authority  of  assertions  by  the  late  President,  cited  by  the 
gentlemen  on  my  right  and  left,  then  we  have,  in  reply,  eulogies  on 
eastern  bravery  and  fidelity,  as  if  belonging  exclusively  to  those 
implicated  in  the  above  schemes.  Some  doubts,  to  be  sure,  on  the 
constitutionality  of  purchasing  Louisiana,  and  some  charges  of  corrup- 
tion in  purchasing  it,  are  reintimated,  perhaps  from  the  same  quarter 
that  repeated  those  charges  twenty  years  since,  and  which  have  been 
so  fully  proved  to  be  groundless,  from  the  recent  account  of  that 
purchase  by  the  Abbe  Marbois ;  and,  in  conclusion,  we  have  again 
the  sectional  attempt  to  make  the  whole  east  believe,  when  the  peace 
party  in  the  east  was  alone  assailed,  that  the  whole  east  has  now, 
in  this  hall,  been  put  to  the  ban  of  the  empire. 

As  a  further  specimen,  the  Senate,  in  answer  to  charges  against  the 
patriotism  of  the  peace  party  in  the  late  war,  have  again  and  again 
been  invited  to  look  at  the  glories  of  Bunker  Hill,  and  Bennington, 
and  Saratoga,  and  Monmouth, — as  if  these  glories  had  been  denied  or 
attacked ;  and,  provided  they  had,  as  if  the  democracy  of  the  east, 
which  supported  the  late  war,  and  those  of  them  which  support  the 
present  administration,  had  no  part  or  lot  in  those  sanguinary  conflicts. 
As  if  the  gallant  Pierce,  who  now  presides  over  my  native  State,  and 


SURVEY   AND   SALE   OF   PUBLIC   LANDS.  115 

the  brave  Stark,  of  the  same  neighborhood,  who  fought  by  the  side  of 
his  immortal  father,  so  singularly  eulogized  in  this  very  debate, — as  if 
the  intrepid  Hall,  who  trod  in  blood  on  the  deck  of  the  Ranger,  as 
lieutenant  to  Paul  Jones, — all  were  not  now  living  monuments,  in  New 
Hampshire,  of  the  part  which  some  of 'the  distinguished  survivors  of  the 
Revolution  take  among  the  democracy  of  the  east,  in  rallying  round  the 
present  executive  of  the  Union.  If  you  turn  there  to  the  whole  muster- 
roll  of  the  survivors  in  that  contest,  you  will  find  the  proportion  of 
them  as  large,  entertaining  the  same  political  views  with  their  heroic 
officers.  The  peace  party  in  the  Revolution  — for  there  was  also  a 
peace  party  in  that  ivar  —  might,  with  just  as  much  propriety,  claim 
all  the  honor  of  the  victories  of  the  Revolution.  Just  as  well  as  the 
peace  party  of  the  last  war,  might  they  seek  to  engross  all  the  credit 
of  those  victories  from  that  part  of  the  democracy  of  the  east  who 
survived  to  mingle  in  the  political  contest  in  favor  of  either  Mr.  Jeffer- 
son's, Mr.  Madison's,  or  the  present  administration.  So,  again,  from 
the  same  quarter,  in  answer  to  censures  bestowed  only  on  the  peace 
party  in  the  east,  we  are  invited  to  gaze  on  the  brilliant  achievements 
of  the  bloody  9th,  the  21st,  and  11th  regiments,  in  1814 ;  and  in 
exultation  against  those  attacking  only  what  the  gentleman  from  Maine 
(Mr.  Holmes)  then  pronounced  "treasonable"  opposition  to  that  war, 
we  are  informed  of  the  prowess,  chivalry,  and  descent  from  New  Eng- 
land loins,  of  those  who,  in  fact,  put  all  in  jeopardy  to  support  that  war. 

Did  it  never  occur  to  gentlemen  that  history  would  be  set  right,  and 
that  those  regiments  and  their  brave  officers  —  their  Ripleys,  their 
Millers,  their  McNeils,  and  their  Weekses  —  all  these  last  natives  of  the 
scoffed  New  Hampshire  —  would  be  known  to  have  sprung  chiefly  from 
the  democracy  of  the  east  ?  and  that  all  of  these  before-named  officers, 
with  perhaps  a  single  exception,  are  decided  supporters  of  this  abused 
administration  ? 

On  the  contrary,  lofty  as  were  the  principles  and  deeds  of  all  the 
wliigs  of  the  Revolution  in  the  east,  yet,  on  all  hands,  it  must  be  con- 
fessed that,  during  the  late  war,  the  patriotism  of  the  leaders  of  a  party 
there  took  a  most  unfortunate  direction.  While  those  taunted  heroes 
of  those  brave  regiments, — taunted  then,  as  most  of  them  now  are, 
with  being  slaves  to  the  south,  and  apostates  from  New  England 
principles, — while  they,  I  say,  were  flying  to  the  then  derided  flag  of 
our  Union,  and  were  pouring  out  their  blood  at  Bridgewater  and  Chip- 
pewa in  defence  of  their  country's  rights,  the  leaders  of  the  "  peace 
party  in  war"  were  seen  flying  to  far  different  scenes  at  Hartford,  and 
pouring  out  from  their  pulpits,  presses,  and  legislative  assemblies, 
anathemas  against  the  administration,  the  war,  and  all  their  supporters. 
Sorry  I  am  to  say  it,  sir,  except  to  "  put  history  right"  in  our  defence, 
—  not  the  mere  maniacs  of  the  party,  as  intimated  by  the  gentleman  on 
my  left  (Mr.  Sprague),  were  engaged  in  this  unfortunate  display  of 
this  new  species  of  patriotism.  But,  with  the  leaders  in  their  pulpit 
services  and  opinions,  were  found  some,  at  least,  of  their  confiding  con- 


116  SURVEY  AND   SALE   OF   PUBLIC   LANDS. 

gregations.  With  the  delegates  of  three  sovereign  States,  and  parts 
of  two  others,  at  Hartford,  were  found,  in  principle,  some  constituents 
to  elect  them.  With  eloquent  representatives  and  senators  here,  were 
found  to  support  them,  at  home  at  least,  a  party,  a  whole  party,  and 
nothing  but  a  party.  On  this  occasion  what  I  say  is  not  to  be  misun- 
derstood, however  much  it  may  be  misrepresented.  When,  in  self- 
defence,  I  allude  to  a  certain  party  and  its  acts  in  the  east,  about  the 
period  of  that  war,  far  be  it  from  me  to  include  all  of  them,  or  of  those, 
in  other  quarters  of  the  Union,  who  had  borne  the  same  party  name. 

It  is  well  known,  in  the  history  of  this  country,  that,  having  lived 
under  a  limited  monarchy  till  the  Revolution,  not  only  then,  but  in  the 
formation  of  our  State  and  general  constitutions,  some  honest  diversity 
of  opinion  existed  as  to  the  extent  and  limits  of  power  safely  to  be 
intrusted  in  the  hands  of  the  people's  agents.  Without  dwelling  on 
the  titles  which  should  be  given  to  the  one  side  for  asking  large  power 
and  much  confidence  in  office-holders,  and  to  the  other  for  granting 
only  small  power  and  limited  confidence,  it  is  sufficient  to  notice  that 
this  division,  coupled  with  other  matter,  from  time  to  time,  connected 
and  incidental,  separated  the  whole  country  into  opposing  parties, — 
parties,  too,  which,  not  then  being  chiefly  sectional,  were  useful,  rather 
than  injurious,  in  rousing  vigilance,  and  in  preserving  unimpaired  the 
reserved  powers  of  the  people  and  the  States.  But,  as  some  more 
exciting  and  more  local  topics  of  difference  occurred, —  an  eastern  chief 
magistrate  being  removed  from  office,  under  complaints  and  remon- 
strances as  doleful  and  violent  as  any  heard  here  on  account  of  more 
recent  removals,  and  his  place  being  supplied  by  a  southern  successor, 
and  a  vast  addition  being  soon  made,  under  that  successor,  to  our 
southern  territory,  and  expected  also  to  be  made  thereby  to  any  pecu- 
liar southern  influence  which  might  prevail  in  the  administration  of  our 
government, — these  general  parties,  so  far  as  respected  one  of  them, 
gradually  assumed  almost  an  entire  sectional  character ;  and,  contrary 
to  the  injunctions  of  Washington,  so  often  urged  on  our  consideration 
in  this  debate,  its  leaders  began  to  drag  into  the  controversy  every 
sectional  interest  and  prejudice  that  nestle  closest  round  the  heart  of 
erring  man. 

The  attempts,  which  two  of  the  distinguished  members  of  that  party 
have  recently  averred  were  soon  after  made,  for  separating  the  Union, 
had  a  poor  apology  in  any  belief  that  the  purchase  of  Louisiana  was 
unconstitutional,  as  one  of  their  then  number,  now  on  this  floor,  seems 
still  to  hold;  and  must  have  been,  from  the  account  of  those  members, 
of  a  mere  rash  and  sectional  character ;  and,  I  have  no  doubt,  met  with 
no  approbation  among  many  of  the  honest  disciples  of  that  party,  even 
in  the  east,  or  among  few,  if  any  of  them,  south  of  the  Hudson.  These 
last  had  no  motives  to  cherish  such  local  and  pernicious  views.  The 
embargo,  non-intercourse,  and  war,  which  soon  and  successively  fol- 
lowed, pressed  with  extreme  severity  on  the  Eastern  States,  and  gave 
the  leaders  of  the  party,  having  thus  become  separated,  by  sectional 


SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  117 

views,  from  their  brethren  elsewhere,  an  opportunity  to  appeal  still 
more  strongly  to  sectional  prejudices,  and  to  renew,  or  begin  for  the 
first  time,  as  the  truth  may  be,  a  course  of  opposition  to  the  General 
Government,  violent  in  language,  disorganizing  in  measures,  and, 
whether  aiming  or  not  at  a  northern  confederacy,  certainly  ending  in 
the  Hartford  Convention.  A  course  of  opposition  which,  to  say  the 
least,  was  anything  but  practising  the  lessons  of  Washington, 
anything  but  real  national  republicanism,  anything  but  respect  for 
the  constituted  authorities,  anything  but  eulogy  on  the  great  minds 
and  patriotic  hearts  then  sent  to  cheer  and  to  bless  us  in  the  prose- 
cution of  that  glorious  war, — anything  but  devotion  to  our  country, 
our  whole  country,  and  nothing  but  our  country.  Whoever  took  the 
lead  then,  in  that  course  of  opposition,  in  or  out  of  Congress, —  who- 
ever is  attacked  by  the  south  or  the  west  for  taking  such  lead, —  I,  for 
one,  protest  that  the  whole  east,  as  a  section,  is  not  to  be  involved  in 
the  defence ;  and  that  its  democracy,  so  far  as  represented  by  me,  has 
neither  been  implicated  in  the  attack,  nor  seen  any  occasion  for  angry 
retort.  The  whole  controversy,  so  far  as  regards  my  friend  to  the 
right  (Mr.  Hayne),  has  been  shown,  by  a  reference  to  his  remarks, 
to  have  arisen  from  strictures  by  him  solely  on  the  peace  party  in  the 
late  war,  and  the  violent  movements  of  its  leaders  in  that  course  of 
opposition;  leaders  and  movements  then  officially,  and  as  strongly 
as  here  now,  denounced  by  a  large  minority  in  the  east  itself,  as  hav- 
ing been  "exclusively  British,"  and  by  which  leaders  and  movements 
the  late  executive  has  publicly  repeated  that  a  separation  of  the 
Union  ivas  openly  stimulated.  Thus  will  it  be  seen  how  different  a 
character  this  course  of  opposition,  both  before  and  during  the  war,  had 
given  to  that  party  in  the  east,  in  respect  to  its  attachment  to  the 
Union,  and  its  patriotism  at  large,  from  what  justly  belonged  to  the 
same  nominal  party  elsewhere.  It  is  by  setting  history  right,  in 
this  way,  that  proper  discriminations  can  be  made  between  nominal 
federalists  in  and  out  of  the  east,  and  even  between  those  in  the  east 
itself  who  led,  and  those  who  were  misled  or  betrayed,  by  sectional 
violence. 

If  gentlemen  please,  I,  for  one,  have  so  little  party  bitterness,  on 
merely  old  party  grounds,  as  to  be  willing  to  go,  in  meeting  their  invi- 
tations to  forgetfulness  of  by-gone  acrimony  and  party  feuds,  more 
than  half  way,  and  to  take  the  epoch  of  the  late  war  as  the  period  of 
amnesty,  beyond  which,  like  the  era  of  Richard  I.  for  other  purposes, 
the  memory  of  man  runneth  not  about  parties,  except  as  connected 
with  historical  facts  and  constitutional  principles  bearing  on  the  present 
administration  of  the  State  and  the  General  Governments.  But  I 
never  can  go  for  any  abandonment  or  compromise  of  those  principles. 

Still  another  concession  will  I  make,  in  justice  to  the  yeomanry  of 
the  east,  many  of  whom,  in  the  late  war,  were  deluded  into  opposition 
by  what  Mr.  Jefferson  called  "  the  Marats,  the  Dantons,  and  Robes- 
pierres,  of  Massachusetts."     (4  Jefferson's  Notes,  210.) 


118  SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS. 

The  same  sectional  attempts  were,  by  that  class  of  leaders,  then 
brought  to  bear  on  their  honest  hearts  and  warm  heads,  which  were 
made  to  bear  on  them  in  the  late  canvass,  and  are  now  continued,  with 
a  view  to  prejudice  them  against  the  south,  and  to  seduce  them  into  a 
belief  that  the  whole  of  New  England  is  proscribed,  and  that  the  real 
interests  of  the  two  regions  are  hostile,  rather  than  united  as  closely 
as  the  interests  and  inclinations  of  married  life.  Is  it  strange,  then, 
that  the  large  mass,  even  of  the  peace  party,  should  thus  have  been 
misled  for  a  time,  by  those  leaders,  clerical  or  political,  in  whom  they 
had  been  accustomed  to  place  implicit  confidence?  And  that  they 
should  fallaciously  appear,  as  if  with  deliberation,  giving  sanction  to 
those  violent  party  acts,  instigated  by  the  mere  leaders  1  —  such  as 
official  refusals,  when  our  hearths  and  altars  were  invaded,  to  place  the 
militia  under  the  officers  of  the  Union  for  defence  ;  such  as  legislative 
exhortations  against  loans  and  enlistments ;  public  votes  and  speeches 
in  Congress  against  raising  additional  troops  for  protection ;  motions 
here,  at  one  time,  to  impeach  Mr.  Jefferson,  and  threats,  at  another, 
that  Mr.  Madison  deserved  a  halter.  Yet,  with  a  similar  lead  to  what 
then  led,  we  are  told,  again  and  again,  in  defence  to  attacks  on  this 
violent  course  of  opposition,  about  New  England  patriotism,  and  New 
England  respect  for  order  and  regular  government, — as  if  these  virtues 
belonged  to  those  alone  who  required  a  defence,  and  as  if  that  class 
of  politicians  possessed  all,  effected  all,  and  were  all  in  all !  As  if, 
for  a  moment's  illustration,  the  soldier's  bones  that  moulder  on  our 
Niagara  frontier  were  those  of  patriotic  volunteers  from  the  Massa- 
chusetts remonstrants,  whom  the  gentleman  on  my  right  then  fear- 
lessly charged  with  taking  the  enemy's  ground,  supporting  his 
claims,  and  justifying  his  aggressions  ;  as  if  the  saving  loans  in 
aid  of  that  glorious  struggle  came  from  those  who  pronounced  the 
struggle  unjust  and  murderous  ;  and  as  if  our  sailors,  who  "  pulled 
down  the  flag  of  the  Guerriere  and  Peacock,"  were  those  who  deemed 
it  immoral  and  irreligious  to  rejoice  at  our  naval  victories  !  Not 
such  as  the  last, — not  such  aid,  nor  such  defenders, —  did  that  crisis 
need. 

JVbn  tali  auxilio  nee  defensoribus  istis 
Tempus  eget. 

Far  be  it  from  me  to  utter  or  feel  a  single  sentiment  of  unkindness 
to  one  individual  who  did  not  participate  in  those  measures  of  oppo- 
sition ;  and  much  less  to  any  one  who  did  participate,  from  honest  con- 
victions they  were  right,  and  who  still  has  the  frankness  and  magnan- 
imity to  avow  it,  and  to  award  full  justice  to  the  abused  democracy  of 
the  east.  Such  thought  and  acted  for  themselves  like  freemen,  and 
disdain  to  shrink  from  their  responsibility  for  it.  But  that  those  of  the 
democracy  of  the  east,  friendly  to  the  present  administration,  and  who 
bore  a  full  share  in  all  the  perils,  sufferings,  and  glories,  of  that  war, 
should  now  be  sneered  at,  as  witnessed  here,  is  what  none,  who  sin- 


SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  119 

cerely  sympathized  with  them  in  that  conflict,  and  have  partaken  with 
them  in  fidelity  to  principle  since,  could  be  guilty  of  without  blushing 
blood,  or  could  in  others  listen  to  without  indignation  and  abhorrence. 
It  is,  then,  I  trust,  distinctly  understood,  that  I  have  cast  no  strictures 
on  federalists,  even  in  the  east,  except  those  who,  after  war  was 
declared,  still  opposed  their  own  government  and  its  measures ;  and, 
according  to  Governor  Eustis,  thus  occasioned  double  sacrifice  of  life 
and  treasure,  while  the  citizens  of  other  States  were  exercising 
their  utmost  energies  against  the  common  enemy.  Even  many  of 
those  I  would  censure  only  as  misguided  and  unfortunate  politicians, — 
men  who,  from  sectional  clamor,  were  made  to  believe  that  the  whole 
east  was  put  to  the  ban  of  the  empire, — who  trusted  too  far  to  the 
groundless  assertions  by  those  who  have  been  here  called  [by  Mr. 
Sprague]  the  bedlamites  of  the  party.  Thus  it  happened,  undoubt- 
edly, that  so  many  grave  legislators,  holy  priests  at  the  altar,  and  other 
seigniors  of  the  land,  both  in  public  and  in  private  life,  were  deluded 
to  join  in  that  violent  opposition. 

This  alone  can  account  for  the  Hartford  Convention,  as  a  solemn, 
deliberate,  and  official  act,  by  the  Legislatures  of  three  sovereign 
States,  and  by  primary  meetings  in  the  federal  portions  of  two  others, 
at  a  moment  when  the  foreign  enemy  had  his  foot  planted  on  our 
sacred  soil,  and  when,  with  a  different  commander  in  the  eastern 
department,  some  of  its  members  might,  we  are  told,  have  had  a  dif- 
ferent trial  from  what  has  yet  been  held  on  them.  Eor  withholding 
the  militia  from  the  General  Government,  as  another  official  act  in 
which  the  judiciary  and  executive  ceremoniously  united,  and  which  has 
since  been  justly  denounced,  by  one  of  their  own  executives,  as  with- 
holding from  the  government  the  constitutional  means  of  defence. 
For  the  exhortations  against  enlistments,  against  joining  the  stars  and 
stripes  of  their  country,  over  which  we  have  had  such  eloquent  eulo- 
gies, as  another  of  those  cold-blooded  official  acts,  instigated  by  Hotspur 
leaders.  The  Massachusetts  Legislature,  in  June,  1812,  say,  "If 
your  sons  must  be  torn  from  you  by  conscription,  consign  them  to  the 
care  of  God ;  but  let  there  be  no  volunteers."  The  loans,  on  which 
gentlemen  dwell  with  such  complacency,  as  evidence  of  eastern  patri- 
otism, were  also  as  violently  denounced  by  the  leaders;  and  came 
mostly  from  that  abused  democracy,  one  of  whom,  a  principal  lender, 
my  near  and  dear  relative,  still  survives  in  that  Cumberland  district 
so  justly  denominated  the  star  in  the  east,  to  see  flung  upon  him,  as 
a  supporter  of  this  administration,  the  sarcasm  of  being  a  new-made 
democrat,  from  near  the  doors  of  the  Hartford  Convention.  The  patri- 
otism of  such  supporters  of  this  administration,  among  the  democracy 
of  the  east, — and,  I  thank  Heaven,  there  are  many  of  them, — took 
rather  a  different  direction  from  the  unfortunate  one  pursued  by  the 
violent  opposers  of  that  war.  Their  patriotism  was  not,  early  as  1806, 
to  ridicule  Mr.  Jefferson  for  his  pacific  war  by  proclamations,  though 
losing  thousands  by  French  and  British  decrees  ;  was  not  to  denounce 


120  SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS. 

and  violently  resist  the  embargo  as  unconstitutional,  and  charge  the 
President  with  French  influence  and  falsehood  in  recommending  it, 
though  their  remaining  vessels  were  rotting  at  their  wharves;  was  not 
to  vote,  speak,  and  write,  in  constant  hostility  to  the  war  and  the  meas- 
ures for  its  success,  though  their  funds  and  their  industry  were  forced 
out  of  customary  employment.     But  it  was, —  if  not 

"  Above  all  Greek,  above  all  Roman  fame," — 

it  was  the  patriotism  of  the  noblest  days  of  the  noblest  of  our  race. 
Though  scoffed  at  as  slaves  to  the  south,  by  persons  now  professing 
to  deprecate  sectional  jealousies,  it  was,  to  devote  all  to  their  country, 
to  enter  the  alarm-list  themselves  for  the  defence  of  the  seaboard, 
to  advocate  enlistments,  to  lend  their  remaining  and  impaired  for- 
tunes to  the  cause ;  and,  in  fine,  for  the  salvation  of  all  those  great 
principles  of  civil  liberty  their  fathers  had  bled  to  secure,  intrepidly  to 
meet  the  domestic  enemy  at  the  polls,  and  send  their  sons  on  the  ocean, 
the  lakes,  and  the  land,  to  meet  the  foreign  enemy  at  the  cannon's 
mouth.  From  the  history  of  all  republics,  they  knew  that  God  had 
preserved  liberty  only  to  vigilance  and  valor.  They,  therefore,  braved 
the  lion  in  his  den.  They  rose  as  their  country  rose,  and  fell  only  as 
her  prospects  fell.  The  victories  of  the  common  enemy  were  a  true 
barometer,  in  every  year,  of  the  victories  and  hopes  of  the  conflicting 
parties  at  home.  I  was  then  of  an  age,  sir,  to  feel  such  things  some- 
what deeply,  and  hence  I  may  speak  of  them  too  earnestly.  But  this 
much  can  with  safety  be  asserted,  that  the  political  war  at  home  was 
but  little  less  arduous  and  exciting  than  the  foreign  one  abroad.  That 
democracy,  though  a  minority  then,  as  now,  in  every  State  in  the  east, 
save  one, — though  abused  then,  as  now,  and  buffeted,  both  in  private 
and  public  life,  by  their  opposers, — had,  and  still  have,  thank  God !  some 
knowledge  of  their  rights,  and  "  knowing,  dare  maintain  them."  In 
the  darkest  hour  of  that  war,  when  civil  butchery  was  in  some  places 
threatened,  —  when  schemes  of  disunion  were  supposed  to  be  maturing, 
and,  according  to  my  friend  here  (Mr.  Grundy),  "  moral  treason" 
stalked  abroad, —  when  the  ardent  yeoman  sometimes  slept  with  his 
fire-arms  at  his  pillow, — when  his  sons  were  absent  as  volunteers  at 
Chippewa  and  Plattsburg,  on  the  lakes  and  the  ocean, —  then  the 
members  of  that  democracy  who  were  at  home  fought  and  endured  the 
moral  and  political  warfare  hardly  paralleled ;  —  the  proscription  and 
persecution  of  private  life,  the  shameless  attacks  of  the  press,  the 
insults  of  heated  partisans,  the  anathemas  of  the  pulpit ;  and,  minor- 
ity as  they  were,  they  fearlessly  faced  the  apologist  of  the  common 
enemy  and  the  libeller  of  their  own  government,  whether  in  the  courts 
of  justice,  the  halls  of  legislation,  or  in  those  primary  meetings  of  the 
thousand  town  democracies  which  cover  our  granite  hills. 

Grant  that  individuals  of  the  party  opposed  to  Mr.  Jefferson  and 
Madison  did  not  unite  in  what  the  former  calls,  in  Massachusetts,  ccthe 


SURVEY   AND   SALE    OF   PUBLIC   LANDS.  121 

parricide  crimes  and  treasons  of  the  late  tear"  but  went  gallantly 
for  their  country,  when  in  peril.  They  have  earned  to  themselves 
laurels  which  they  richly  deserve  to  wear,  and  which  Heaven  forbid  I 
should  attempt  to  soil.  They  relinquished  opposition  when  the  com- 
mon enemy  approached,  and  stood  by  their  country,  and  their  whole 
country ;  and  did  not  lend  a  helping  hand  to  those  sectional  excitements 
that  often  belittle  and  dishonor  the  politics  of  New  England.  By  such 
excitements,  groundlessly  defaming  the  democracy  of  the  east  and  of 
other  parts  of  the  Union,  has  the  glory  departed  from  her  Israel,  more 
than  by  any  change  of  relative  population  and  territory.  But  if  the 
violent  leaders  of  the  eastern  opposition  to  the  war  then,  as  since, 
constantly  poured  out  on  the  democracy  of  that  section  the  uncourteous 
epithets  of  Jacobins  and  Judases,  and  styled  them,  as  the  whole  admin- 
istration has  been  styled  in  this  debate,  a  motley  collection  of  the  frag- 
ments of  all  parties,  with  no  common  bond  of  principle,  and  held 
together  by  a  mere  rope  of  sand, —  if  these  abusers  then,  as  now, 
made  very  modest  claims  to  all  the  talents,  order,  and  religion, — I  stand 
not  here  to  retort  in  kind ;  but  courteously  to  seek  justice  for  myself 
and  my  political  friends  from  unfounded  imputations,  and  to  say,  with 
sober-mindedness  and  charity,  that,  leaving  our  opponents  to  the  enjoy- 
ment of  all  their  real  worth, — which,  in  many  respects,  I  freely  admit 
to  be  enviable, — yet  I  do  contend  that,  in  private  or  public  life,  there 
is  no  ground  for  discrimination  in  their  favor  against  that  much  vilified 
democracy,  in  all  the  hardy  and  heroic  virtues  which  have  distin- 
guished New  England,  if  not  more  highly,  yet  in  common  with  the 
Middle  States  and  the  south,  since  the  Puritan  and  merchant  adven- 
turers first  landed  at  Plymouth  Rock  and  Strawberry  Bank, —  virtues 
deeply  founded  as  her  hills,  and  pure  as  her  mountain  streams.  No 
ground  for  discrimination  against  that  democracy,  in  either  correct 
morals,  tireless  industry,  or  unsleeping  enterprise ;  —  no  ground  for 
discrimination  in  doing  their  full  share  to  build  up  the  fisheries,  extend 
commerce,  and  scatter  plenty  o'er  a  sterile  soil, —  to  erect  and  pre- 
serve all  the  Doric,  if  not  Corinthian  columns,  of  our  whole  social 
edifice  in  the  east ;  and  in  doing  more  than  their  full  share,  because 
their  political  principles  did  not  forbid  them  to  take  a  share  with  their 
brethren  of  the  other  States,  in  bearing  the  flag  of  victory,  whether 
over  land  or  ocean,  in  the  Revolution  or  the  late  war. 

They  have  always  met  the  struggle  with  firmness,  and,  in  common 
with  other  parts  of  the  Union,  with  entire  devotion,  in  times  of  peril 
to  the  common  cause,  of  their  lives,  their  fortune,  and  their  sacred 
honor.  They  never  halted  between  two  opinions,  when  the  wolf  icas 
on  the  walk  —  when  the  enemy  was  on  our  soil.  They  had,  and  still 
have,  quite  too  much  of  the  Roman,  not  to  endure  embargoes  and 
wars,  and  even  death,  for  their  country,  whether  on  their  own  sea- 
board or  on  a  distant  and  savage  frontier,  when  that  country  and  its 
honor  call  for  the  sacrifice.  This  they  have  shown  by  deeds,  not 
words ;  and  this,  I  will  give  my  pledge,  they  will  always  show,  when 


122  SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS. 

occasion  demands.  But,  once  for  all,  I  will  repeat,  that  that  democracy 
make,  and  have  made,  no  pledges  to  men,  independent  of  their  meas- 
ures ;  and  that,  so  far  as  represented  by  me,  they  will  offer  or  seek  no 
new  alliances,  and  consent  to  none.  They  have  made  no  old  alliances, 
and  consent  to  none,  whether  with  the  west  or  the  south,  except  the 
general  alliance  of  all,  in  the  bonds  of  the  Union.  They  will  neither 
cajole,  nor  flatter,  nor  bargain.  Those  of  New  Hampshire  would 
fain  stand  among  the  other  States,  as  a  peer  among  peers,  a  sovereign 
among  sovereigns,  an  equal  among  equals ;  recognizing  the  rights  of 
no  mere  man  from  the  east  to  tender  or  pledge  them,  either  to  make 
or  unmake  Presidents  —  to  pull  down  or  build  up  administrations. 

They  mean  to  go  where  democratic  principles  go  — palman  ferat 
qui  meruit ;  and  when  these  principles  disappear,  they  mean  to  halt. 
Such  were  the  views  that  led  their  young  men,  in  the  late  war,  to  succor 
the  bleeding  west ;  and  in  their  cause,  as  well  as  that  of  their  coun- 
try at  large,  to  moisten  with  their  blood  the  fields  of  Tippecanoe  and 
the  forests  of  Brownstown ;  —  while  from  the  ranks  of  a  different  party 
in  that  war,  however  prodigal  in  professions  of  friendship  now  to  the 
west,  not  a  drum  was  heard — not  a  gun  was  fired.  These  views, 
in  peace,  likewise,  have  led  them  to  aid  to  populate,  and  protect  from 
the  savage,  the  smiling  valleys  of  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi ;  and  these 
will  always  lead  them,  whether  there  or  at  home  in  the  east,  cheerfully 
to  unite  in  every  measure  they  believe  constitutional,  for  the  relief 
or  improvement  of  those  who  have  suffered  with  them  in  the  common 
cause. 

Can  it  be  doubted  that  the  same  feelings  would  not  lead  them  to 
assist,  in  the  same  way,  either  the  Middle  States  or  the  south,  in  the 
embarrassments  of  their  industry  and  trade,  or  in  their  utmost  need, 
by  invasion  or  war? 

On  the  exciting  topic  of  slavery,  as  connected  with  the  south,  and 
introduced  into  this  debate,  it  is  true  they  have  honest  and  deep-rooted 
opinions.  But  this  Congress  knows,  and  the  Union  knows,  that, 
averse  as  the  democracy  of  the  east  are  to  slavery,  and  aiding  as  they 
have,  within  only  about  the  last  half-century,  to  abolish  it  all  over 
New  England,  and  anxious  as  they  are  for  its  extirpation  from  the 
whole  country,  yet,  never  have  they  joined,  and  never  will  join,  in 
the  sectional  tirade  against  the  south  as  "black  States."  They  are 
convinced  that  there,  as  in  the  east  half  a  century  ago,  slavery  must 
be  left  to  be  regulated  by  the  domestic  opinions  of  each  sovereign 
State  itself,  founded  on  its  own  better  knowledge  of  its  own  climate, 
productions,  industry,  and  social  policy;  and  that  any  great  change  in 
the  civil  institutions  of  a  State  must,  to  be  wise,  useful,  and  perma- 
nent, always  be  cautiously  considered,  and  gradually  commenced. 

They  cherish,  also,  I  am  satisfied,  the  same  kindly  feeling  towards 
the  south,  on  the  subject  of  the  tariff,  that  they  do,  and  have  done, 
towards  the  west,  on  subjects  deeply  affecting  the  interests  and  pros- 
perity of  the  west.    Instead  of  laughing  at  the  calamities  of  the  south, 


SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  123 

and  mocking  their  complaints,  God  knows  we  have  had  of  late  sufficient 
reasons  at  the  east  to  make  us  feel,  in  common  suffering,  common 
sympathies ;  and  to  cast  about,  if  possible,  for  the  consideration  of  any 
measures  likely  to  bring  relief  and  harmony.  The  very  executive 
who  signed  the  last  tariff  bill  officially  declared  it  "  in  its  details  not 
acceptable  to  the  great  interests  of  any  portion  of  the  Union,  —  not 
even  to  the  interests  which  it  was  specially  intended  to  subserve" 
(See  President's  Message,  Dec.  1828.) 

Among  the  merchants  and  manufacturers,  the  wide  and  desolating 
failures  at  the  east,  since  that  declaration,  have  more  than  verified 
the  evils  naturally  to  be  anticipated  from  a  bill  of  that  character. 
The  present  executive,  also,  has  declared,  that  "  some  of  its  provi- 
sions require  modification"     (See  President's  Message,  1829.) 

The  gentleman  before  me  (Mr.  Silsbee)  can  testify  that  nothing 
like  a  parallel  to  those  failures  has  occurred  in  the  east  for  a  quarter 
of  a  century.  How  much  of  this  deep  distress  there  has  been  caused 
by  our  present  unequal  tariff,  I  and  my  constituents,  I  am  satisfied, 
wish  to  inquire,  —  not  from  hostility  to  the  protecting  principle,  as 
an  incident  to  raising  revenue,  or  as  countervailing  legislation  against 
oppressive  foreign  measures,  or,  in  some  cases,  as  a  means  of  prepar- 
ation in  peace  for  the  wants  of  war,  —  on  that  point  most  of  us  har- 
monize, —  but  to  see  whether  any  just  and  equal  legislation  requires, 
in  profound  peace,  and  with  a  prosperous  revenue,  that  the  people  of 
New  Hampshire  alone  should  pay  more  than  their  State  tax  yearly  as 
a  duty  on  salt,  —  on  a  single  article  of  the  first  necessity  in  life ; 
should  pay  over  one  hundred  per  cent,  tax  on  molasses,  and  other 
great  necessaries;  and  should  be  taxed  most  expensively  for  every 
nail  driven  in  a  farmer's  door,  every  bolt  in  a  vessel,  every  yard  of 
canvas  spread  on  the  ocean,  and  every  pound  of  sugar,  coffee,  or  tea, 
that  brings  comfort  to  the  domestic  fireside.  We  wish  to  inquire 
whether  this  is  to  be  persisted  in,  after  the  impost  will  not  be  needed 
for  either  revenue  or  protection,  but  merely  to  enable  this  or  any  other 
administration  to  dole  out  sops  or  bribes  to  win  States  that  hold  the 
balance  of  political  power,  or  who  give  signs  of  insubordination  to  the 
powers  that  be.  We  do  not  wish  to  attempt  anything  but  equal  jus- 
tice between  the  three  great  branches  of  industry :  but  agree  with  the 
executive  of  New  Hampshire,  in  1822  : 

"  No  policy  can  be  more  obviously  unsound  than  that  of  creating  manufactures, 
unconnected  with  national  defence,  or  important  to  national  interests,  at  the  public 
expense,  to  be  permanently  supported  by  the  same  means.  However  disguised  such 
procedure  might  be,  it  would  be,  in  its  effects,  the  imposition  of  a  perpetual  tax  upon 
the  productive  branches  of  national  industry,  to  be  applied  to  the  support  of  an 
unproductive  one."  —  19th  JViles'  Register,  p.  2G2. 

We  never  can  agree  that  eight-tenths  of  our  population,  as  farmers, 
are  not  entitled  to.  full  consideration  in  tariff  legislation ;  and  that  our 
Old-fashioned  fisheries  and  navigation  are  to  be  sent  to  sea  adrift,  with- 


124  SURVEY  AND   SALE   OF  PUBLIC  LANDS. 

out  their  due  proportion  of  favor  and  protection.  We  have  lords  of 
the  soil,  as  well  as  lords  of  the  spindle;  and  I,  for  one,  though  friendly 
to  a  moderate  and  equal  tariff,  on  the  principles  before  named,  can 
never  consent  that  the  self-styled  American  system  shall  be  confined 
in  its  bounties  to  spinning-jennies  alone,  and  exclude,  as  worthless 
and  undeserving,  our  agriculture  and  our  commerce.  Much  less  can 
I  consent  that  the  American  system  shall  be  converted  into  a  hobby- 
horse, on  which  any  aspirant  whatever  may  ride  into  political  power. 
"  111- vaulting  ambition  doth  o'erleap  itself."  And  the  notions  of  a 
distinguished  member  (Mr.  Webster)  of  the  other  House,  in  1824, 
on  American  industry,  have  ever  met  with  my  entire  approbation. 

"Gentlemen  tell  us  they  are  in  favor  of  domestic  industry  ;  —  so  am  I.  They 
would  give  it  protection ;  —  so  would  I.  But,  then,  all  domestic  industry  is  not  confined 
to  manufactures.  The  employments  of  agriculture,  commerce  and  navigation,  are  all 
branches  of  the  same  domestic  industry  ;  they  all  furnish  employment  for  American 
capital  and  American  labor.  And  when  the  question  is,  whether  new  duties  shall  be 
laid,  for  the  purpose  of  giving  further  encouragement  to  particular  manufactures, 
every  reasonable  man  must  ask  himself  both  whether  the  proposed  new  encourage- 
ment be  necessary,  and  whether  it  can  be  given  without  injustice  to  other  branches 
of  industry."—  2Uh  Niles'  Register,  p.  412. 

Entertaining  such  notions  on  these  topics,  I  must  be  pardoned  if, 
as  one  of  the  majority,  I  decline  to  accept  the  invitation  of  the  gentle- 
man on  my  right,  from  Missouri  (Mr.  Barton),  to  stand  on  his  new 
political  platform,  whether  of  nine  or  thirty-nine  articles  of  opposition 
to  the  present  administration.  Without  claiming  for  this  administra- 
tion infallibility,  I  still  believe  its  general  course  of  policy  democratic 
and  constitutional ;  and  my  friend  from  Louisiana  can  inform  him  or 
the  gentleman  from  Maine  of  as  severe  Jeremiads  for  the  loss  of  office 
in  1801  as  now,  — can  inform  him  that,  in  the  principle  of  rotation 
in  office  for  even  political  motives,  this  policy  only  follows  up  the  doc- 
trines of  the  great  revolution  of  1800, — and  that,  since,  it  has,  in 
practice,  had  the  sanction  of  the  people  and  the  States  in  every  quar- 
ter of  the  Union.  Even  in  Maine,  "  without  respect  to  sex,  age  or 
condition,"  to  use  its  senator's  language,  when  parties  are  strongly 
divided,  the  same  policy  has  been  pushed  through,  to  the  removal  of 
doorkeepers. 

It  is  the  true  republican  doctrine.  A  rotation  first  made  by  the 
people  themselves  in  the  highest  office  in  the  land,  —  the  chief  execu- 
tive of  the  Union,  —  and  made  for  political  cause,  for  probata  as  well 
as  allegata,  according  to  the  verdict  returned ;  —  does  not  the  same 
cause  affect  most  of  the  active  deputies  and  subordinates,  as  well  as  the 
principal  1  Whatever  disappointment  and  suffering  by  removal  some 
individuals  may  sustain,  deserving  and  receiving  in  many  respects  my 
private  sympathy,  yet  they  knew  the  legal  tenure  of  their  offices, 
and,  if  violent  partisans,  should  disdain  to  hold  them  under  men  and 
an  administration  they  have  wantonly  calumniated.  Hence,  the  agents 
of  the  people  cannot  fear  the  cry  of  cruelty,  persecution  or  Ne?*oism, 


SURVEY  AND  SALE  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS.  125 

when  following  calmly  the  example  set  by  the  people  themselves ;  — 
when,  at  the  worst,  if  the  power  of  removal  be  discreetly  exercised, 
doing  no  injury  to  the  public,  but  to  "change  one  good  man  for 
another  good  one,"  — and  when  teaching  to  many  the  salutary  lesson 
in  a  republic,  that  office-holders  have  no  property  in  their  offices,  and 
that  liability  to  removal  tends  to  increase  industry  and  fidelity.  Nor 
need  those  agents  dread  the  discussion  of  the  constitutionality  of  the 
exercise  of  a  power  of  removal  which  was  legislatively  recognized  by 
the  very  first  Congress  under  the  constitution,  —  was  then  advocated 
by  the  framers  of  that  constitution,  and  has  been  practised  on,  at  pleas- 
ure, by  every  executive,  from  Washington  to  the  present  chief  magis- 
trate. The  extent  of  the  exercise  has  been  left  to  the  discretion  and 
policy  of  that  branch  of  the  government  whose  duty  it  is  "  to  see  the 
laws  faithfully  executed ;"  and  if  it  was  less  under  one  and  more  under 
another  administration,  it  has  always  been  influenced  by  the  state  of 
that  administration,  whether  coming  in  as  opposed  or  hostile  to  their 
predecessors,  and  whether  in  a  minority  or  a  majority,  so  as  to  be  able 
to  accomplish  their  wishes.  The  other  doctrine  is  the  doctrine  of 
minorities ;  and,  if  correct,  the  tenure  of  all  office  might  as  well  be 
changed  to  life,  and  our  government  become  in  name,  as  in  practice, 
a  monarchy.  Then,  in  earnest,  well  might  we  accept  the  proposition 
of  the  gentleman  to  go  over  to  the  minority  for  greater  tranquillity, 
and,  as  in  other  monarchies  and  despotisms,  see  how  admirably  minor- 
ities can  govern.  One  accidental  instance  of  such  a  government,  by 
way  of  illustration,  may  possibly  have  been  given  us  this  session,  in 
respect  to  the  printing  of  the  public  documents ;  and,  I  must  confess, 
it  has  not  diminished  my  aversion  to  such  kinds  of  governments,  and 
especially  to  their  practical  doctrines  on  public  economy.  If  the 
gentleman  from  Missouri,  on  my  right  (Mr.  Barton),  seeks  by  such 
measures  to  pull  down  this  administration,  he  may  not  find  it  so 
11  downhill  a  business"  as  he  represented  the  pulling  down  admin- 
istrations in  this  country  usually  to  be.  Perhaps  it  would  be  well, 
before  further  taunts  of  this  kind  are  repeated,  to  set  history  right,  and 
to  recollect  that  pulling  down  administrations  in  this  country  has  never 
proved  quite  so  easy  and  downhill  a  business  as  seems  to  be  supposed, 
when  the  administrations  have  been  democratic.  Not  a  very  downhill 
concern  when  it  was  attempted  on  either  Mr.  Jefferson's,  Madison's 
or  Monroe's  administrations; — but  rather  easier,  to  be  sure, — rather 
more  of  a  downhill  concern, — in  the  two  " four-year"  administrations 
in  this  country,  suspected,  at  least,  of  no  very  great  devotion  to  some 
of  the  leading  principles  of  democracy.  I  shall  neither  vaunt  nor 
prophesy,  but  only  express  a  doubt  that,  if  the  present  administration 
may  yet  be  as  easily  pulled  down,  it  will  not  be  pulled  down  by  such 
measures  as  the  printing  resolution,  nor  exactly  by  such  politicians  as 
now  lead  in  the  attack  on  that  administration.  If  beaten  ever  in  that 
way  for  a  few  days,  the  friends  of  it  probably  have  Antaean  vigor 
enough  to  rise  stronger  from  the  fall.  If  the  administration,  relying 
11* 


126  STATE    OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY. 

upon  its  real  friends,  and  on  the  true  principles  of  democracy,  is  still 
occasionally  beaten,  whether  in  fact,  or  only  on  paper  and  in  party 
credulity,  the  opposition  may  find  it  "will  not  long  stay  beaten ;  and 
this  "  downhill  business"  may  prove  an  uphill  job  to  the  undertakers. 
At  least,  if  this  administration  is  ever,  by  such  leaders  and  in  this 
way,  rolled  to  the  bottom  of  the  hill,  I  may,  as  a  Yankee,  be  allowed 
to  guess  that  those  leaders,  like  Sisyphus,  will  find  it  must  speedily 
be  rolled  back  again. 

I  have  thus  finished,  Mr.  President,  what  my  sense  of  duty,  pain- 
fully in  some  respects,  has  urged  me  to  say  on  this  occasion ;  and  if, 
in  the  cause  of  my  political  friends,  I  may  have  flung  myself  on  the 
spears  of  my  enemies  to  perish,  I  shall  be  content  to  perish  in  a  cause 
which  my  heart  loves  and  my  judgment  approves. 


STATE   OF   THE  NATIONAL   TREASURY. 


I  am  opposed  to  this  motion.*  I  would  not  waste  the  public  money 
in  printing  and  disseminating  among  the  people  extra  copies  of  a 
report,  which,  from  some  cause  or  other,  has  unfortunately  fallen  into 
many  errors,  both  as  to  facts  and  principles.  They  are  errors  too,  sir, 
neither  small  in  magnitude  nor  unimportant  to  the  main  business  of 
this  extraordinary  session,  at  which  are  recommended  measures  most 
dangerous  to  the  relations  now  existing  between  the  States  and  the 
General  Government,  as  well  as  to  the  future  liberties  of  the  Ameri- 
can people. 

I  shall  proceed  to  point  out  some  of  them,  fearlessly ;  but  not  from 
any  captious  spirit,  or  any  unfriendly  feeling.  On  the  contrary,  the 
task  of  fault-finding  is  to  me  very  painful,  if  not  ungracious,  and  will 
be  carried  no  further  than  is  necessary  to  the  discharge  of  a  public 
duty ;  and  a  duty  from  which  the  suggestions  or  threats  that  I  shall 
be  answered,  will  not  deter  me  a  single  moment.  It  is  my  desire  to 
be  replied  to,  as  full  and  free  discussion,  rather  than  stifling  debate,  is 
the  life-blood  of  liberty ;  and,  if  my  opinions  in  respect  to  the  mistaken 
contents  of  this  report  are  wrong,  I  am  anxious  they  should  be 
exposed.     I  seek  light,  and  not  grounds  for  censure. 

Once  for  all,  likewise,  let  me  tell  gentlemen  on  the  opposite  side,  I 
am  not  going  to  dwell  on  mere  clerical  errors  in  adding  up  numbers, 
—  much  of  which,  in  a  department  with  two  or  three  hundred  clerks 
and  nine  or  ten  bureaus,  must,  of  necessity,  be  done  by  subordinates. 

*  A  speech  on  the  motion  of  Mr.  Clay,  of  Kentucky,  to  print  one  thousand  five 
hundred  copies  of  the  Report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  (Mr.  Ewing)  on  the 
Finances  ;  delivered  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  June  16,  1841. 


STATE   OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY.  127 

On  the  contrary,  I  shall  endeavor  to  exercise  a  liberal  charity ; 
though  a  former  Secretary  of  that  department  has  not  always  met 
with  similar  indulgence  from  those  opposed  to  him,  but  has  been  rep- 
resented before  the  country  as  muddy-headed,  a  blunderer,  and  a 
blockhead,  on  account  of  language  misquoted,  and  which  he  never 
used ;  and  an  appropriation  proposed  to  send  him  to  school  to  learn 
arithmetic,  because  one  of  his  clerks  omitted  a  figure,  or  the  printer 
mistook  a  figure  in  the  manuscript. 

In  relation  to  another  grievous  charge,  that  former  fiscal  statements 
had  sometimes  been  obscure,  —  a  charge  quite  as  often  made  against 
Hamilton  himself,  in  his  day,  —  did  it  never  occur  to  the  imagination 
of  such  croakers  that  part  of  the  obscurity  might  exist  in  their  own 
brains,  and  happen  either  from  ignorance  or  inattention  to  such  a 
complicated  and  difficult  subject  1 

I  will  not,  therefore,  even  try  to  imitate  any  of  this  kind  of  extraor- 
dinary courtesy  exhibited  by  them,  but  will  say  what  is  true  con- 
cerning most  errors  of  that  description :  they  are  at  times  inevitable, 
in  such  numerous  details  devolved  on  others ;  and  that  the  present 
Secretary  will  be  censured  by  me  only  when  his  material  results  are 
wrong,  his  leading  principles  wrong,  or  his  impressions  are  negli- 
gently communicated  to  others,  and  are  thus  doing  wrong.  For 
instance,  in  the  outset,  I  would  observe,  that,  in  the  Senate  copy  of 
this  report,  a  statement  appears  that  the  outstanding  appropriations  on 
the  4th  of  March,  when  the  present  administration  came  into  power, 
were  thirty-three  millions  and  a  fraction.  But,  in  truth,  his  own  items 
amount  to  quite  a  million  more.  Now,  this  is  probably  a  mistake  in 
addition  only.  Again :  his  item  for  civil  and  diplomatic  expenses,  in 
reaching  that  aggregate,  is  in  this  copy  six  millions  and  a  fraction, 
while  in  the  copy  printed  by  the  House  of  Representatives  it  is  quite 
a  million  less.  This  may  charitably  be  presumed  a  mistake  in  copy- 
ing. Again :  he  twice  states,  in  the  Senate  copy,  the  receipts  in  the 
first  two  months  of  this  year  from  the  United  States  Bank  as  being 
over  seventeen  thousand,  whereas  they  could  not,  in  truth,  be  but  once, 
and  are  but  once,  added  up. 

I  should  feel  as  if  losing  some  self-respect  to  run  off  in  a  train  of 
severe  invective  in  regard  to  these  errors.  I  am  for  higher  game. 
It  would  be  only  a  great  many  such  errors  that  would  justly  tend  to 
detract  from  the  weight  of  the  whole  report,  so  far  as  they'  indicated 
haste,  much  inadvertence,  or  little  attention  to  accuracy,  either  in  the 
head  or  limbs  of  the  department. 

Another  apology,  in  one  sense  of  the  word,  is  due  for  both  the 
Secretary  and  President,  on  account  of  their  being  somewhat  new  and 
inexperienced  in  office;  though  it  certainly  would  behoove  them, 
under  such  circumstances,  to  exercise  unusual  vigilance  to  avoid 
errors,  and  not,  like  the  Secretary,  to  travel  almost  out  of  the  road, 
and  go  into  certain  uncalled-for  calculations  of  receipts  and  expendi- 
tures for  a  quarter  of  a  century,  for  no  possible  object,  which  I  can 


128  STATE   OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY. 

divine,  except  the  partisan  one  of  casting  reproach  on  his  immediate 
predecessors.  If  he  had  leisure  for  this,  it  might  perhaps  have  been 
quite  as  usefully  devoted  to  making  his  figures  and  calculations,  in 
respect  to  the  great  objects  of  this  session,  a  little  more  accurate  than 
I  shall  feel  compelled  soon  to  show  them  to  be. 

Indeed,  some  charity  might  still  be  due  on  another  account :  that 
is,  the  manner  in  which  their  friends  represent  them  to  have  been 
interrupted  and  incommoded  by  the  irruption  of  Vandal  hordes  of 
office-seekers,  coming  from  that  disinterested  party  which  so  abhors 
the  doctrine  that  to  the  victors  belong  the  spoils.  They  are  repre- 
sented as  more  voracious  for  office  than  the  most  famished  harpies,  and 
to  have  helped  destroy  already  one  President,  and,  if  not  made  of  iron, 
will  embitter  the  life  of  his  successor.  If  this  account  be  true,  both 
the  President  and  Secretary  require  some  forgiveness  for  financial 
mistakes,  particularly  as  their  position  may  impose  other  employments 
on  them,  and  not  very  consistent  with  close  attention  to  financial 
details,  and  not  very  different  from  what  Lord  Bolingbroke  writes  to 
Sir  William  Wyndham  was  the  situation  of  his  party  and  cabinet, 
when  it  came  into  power.     He  says : 

"  The  principal  spring  of  our  actions  was  to  have  the  government  of  the  State  in 
our  hands  ;  that  our  principal  views  were  the  conservation  of  this  power  ;  great 
employments  to  ourselves,  and  great  opportunities  of  rewarding  those  who  have  helped 
to  raise  us,  and  of  harming  those  who  stood  in  opposition  to  us." 

It  will  be  proper  often,  on  this  occasion,  to  advert  to  the  message,  to 
see  whether  it  throws  any  new  light  on  the  report,  where  obscure  or 
doubtful,  —  if  it  be  possible  for  a  document  to  be  of  that  character 
which  has  been  so  much  commended  by  its  friends  for  accuracy,  and 
what  they  classically  term  "intelligibility,"  and  being  "understand- 
able." 

But  the  President  seems,  in  such  statements,  to  be  peculiarly 
entitled  to  indulgence ;  because,  as  a  general  rule,  he  must  obtain  his 
details  and  conclusions  on  fiscal  matters  from  the  appropriate  organ, 
which  is  the  treasury  department;  and  he  refers  expressly  to  "the 
report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury"  for  his  data.     (p.  3.) 

The  President,  however,  may  well  be  considered  responsible  for  any 
mistaken  general  principle  he  urges  on  these  matters,  but  no  further. 
And  to  that  extent,  in  a  few  instances,  I  shall  be  obliged  to  question 
at  least  his  political  orthodoxy  on  some  points,  in  the  course  of  this 
unpleasant  discussion. 

In  making  a  scrutiny  of  this  report,  and  the  fiscal  parts  of  the  mes- 
sage, the  public  time  shall  not  be  wasted  by  me  on  what  is  not  vitally 
essential  to  the  whole  object,  end  and  aim,  of  this  extraordinary 
session. 

Why,  then,  are  we  now  deliberating  here,  at  this  most  busy  and  inter- 
esting season  of  the  year  1  The  country  is  breathless  with  expectation 
to  see  with  some  certainty  the  appalling  cause.     Why  have  we  been 


STATE   OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY.  129 

summoned  from  our  ploughs,  our  professional  pursuits,  our  hearths, 
and  our  altars,  except  on  account  of  some  unexpected  and  astounding 
difficulty,  either  in  the  finances  or  our  foreign  relations,  menacing 
ruin  or  war  ?  If  moneyed  matters  stood  on  the  17th  of  March  —  the 
date  of  the  call  —  as  they  did  on  the  1st  of  that  month,  why  did  not 
Congress  provide  for  an  extra  session,  if  one  was  deemed  necessary? 
Why  was  not  one  moved  in  that  body,  and  the  reasons  for  it  assigned  1 
But  no.  When  none  had  been  even  proposed  in  Congress,  and  two 
days  after  the  celebrated  panic  instructions  to  the  Attorney  General 
in  McLeod's  case,  there  bursts  suddenly  on  the  American  world  the 
proclamation  for  this  session.  How  happened  this  ?  Had  the  timor- 
ous feeling  which  some  have  supposed  dictated  those  instructions  not 
subsided?  And  was  Congress  to  be  summoned  in  reality  on  that 
account,  but  in  appearance  on  account  of  fiscal  difficulties  then  or  soon 
apprehended  ?  Did  this  administration  tremble  lest  our  old  oppressors, 
who  had  long  before  murdered  our  peaceful  citizens,  and  burnt  our 
property,  should  suddenly  make  war  on  us,  instead  of  we  on  them  ? 
and  that,  after  they  had  avowed  and  justified  the  barbarous  outrage, 
and  the  executive  had  stipulated  to  do  all  in  its  power  to  comply  with 
their  imperious  wishes  ?  Did  it  hasten  to  call  this  session  for  relief 
and  advice,  after  first  agreeing  to  give  up  one  of  the  offenders  as 
soon  as  practicable,  and  not  merely  to  protect  him  as  a  hostage  or 
prisoner  of  war  1  Did  it  tamely  engage  to  surrender  the  gasconading 
culprit,  without  first  receiving  explanation  or  atonement,  —  either 
indemnity  for  the  past  or  security  for  the  future  1 

Sir,  the  ashes  of  John  Hancock  and  Samuel  Adams,  could  they 
have  heard  the  proposition  in  the  stillness  of  their  tombs,  would  have 
started  to  life  with  indignant  remonstrance. 

But  if  this,  or  any  other  extraordinary  cause,  except  the  finances, 
then  existed,  and  was  the  chief  cause,  and  has  since  passed  away,  it 
WTould  have  been  manly  and  proper,  if  deemed  competent,  to  have 
revoked  the  summons  for  the  session,  or  it  would  be  well  now  to  close 
it  by  an  early  adjournment.  But  if  there  was  then  some  fiscal  diffi- 
culty, of  sufficient  magnitude  alone  to  justify  all  this  inconvenience  of 
forcing  six  or  seven  States  into  premature  elections,  virtually  disfran- 
chising two  States  that  have  not  been  able  yet  to  make  elections,  and 
imposing  an  expense  on  the  treasury  of  more  than  half  a  million  of 
dollars,  then  let  us  see  what  it  was.  There  was,  to  be  sure,  one 
appalling  discovery,  about  that  important  era,  in  connection  with  the 
treasury  department ;  but  I  believe  that  all  the  evils  connected  with 
it  were  overcome  before  nightfall,  and  that  without  the  help  of  any 
extraordinary  session  of  Congress.  The  President,  it  is  understood, 
believing,  from  some  contemptible  spy,  that  some  of  the  old  officers 
were  committing  errors  in  passing  an  account,  resorted  to  the  very 
novel  and  military  measure  of  stopping,  by  his  simple  Jiat,  the  whole 
operations  of  that  department.  The  sub-treasury,  as  well  as  the  set- 
tlement of  accounts,  came  to  a  dead  halt,  without  the  help  of  the  bill  of 


130  STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY. 

repeal  from  the  senator  from  Kentucky ;  and  an  act  for  which  General 
Jackson  would  have  been  assailed  throughout  the  Union,  and  impeached 
here, — an  act  to  suspend  all  the  fiscal  laws,  instead  of  seeing  that  they 
be  executed, — was  so  soon  found  to  be  unnecessary,  illegal,  and  uncon- 
stitutional, as  to  be  revoked  early,  and  the  origin  of  it  not  now  pre- 
tended to  be  one  of  those  "weighty  matters"  which  have  led  to  this 
early  meeting. 

What,  then,  were  those  matters  "  principally  pertaining  (as  the 
proclamation  says)  to  the  finances  and  revenue  of  the  country"? 
Was  it  some  monstrous  "arrearage  of  forty  millions"  that  should 
be  immediately  discharged,  and  about  which  the  rumors  and  grave 
calculations  had  puzzled  some  great  financial  brains,  in  and  out  of  Con- 
gress, for  several  months  previous  1  None,  none.  Even  now,  after 
three-quarters  of  a  year  in  possession  of  the  books  and  files,  it  is 
admitted  by  the  Secretary  that  there  was  then  a  balance  on  hand,  of 
money  and  other  resources,  amply  sufficient  to  meet  all  arrearages 
then  or  since  existing.  And  here  I  must  express  my  obligations 
personally  to  the  Secretary  for  having  now  made  public,  officially,  the 
important  fact  that  more  money  was  found  to  be  on  hand  the  4th  of 
March  than  was  estimated  by  his  predecessor.  This  appeared,  also, 
clearly,  either  from  those  old  books,  which  seemed  so  very  obscure 
last  winter  to  the  financial  talents  of  some  senators,  or  from  those 
notable  new  books  which  were  opened,  and,  by  some  whig  magic,  were 
to  detect  all  kinds  of  embezzlement  and  villany. 

By  table  B,  annexed  to  this  report,  it  seems  that  from  fifty  to 
seventy  thousand  dollars  more  money  was  likewise  ascertained  to  be 
in  the  treasury  than  the  accounts  required.  Gratifying  result,  cer- 
tainly !  —  a  most  commendable  kind  of  defalcation,  after  all  the 
calumnious  rumors  as  to  high  peculations  bruited  over  the  country 
then  and  since. 

Next  let  me  inquire  if  there  was  any  deficit  on  the  17th  of  March, 
when  this  session  was  summoned  ? 

I  invite  any  gentleman  on  the  Committee  of  Finance  to  point  it  out, 
if  stated  in  the  report.     There  is  none.     None  whatever. 

Was  there  any  deficit  on  the  30th  of  May  —  the  day  we  met? 
None.  But  the  Secretary  and  President  admit  two  to  three  millions 
of  available  resources  on  hand,  besides  the  accruing  revenue. 

Is  there  any  deficit  now  ?  Far  from  it.  I  ask  once  more,  then, 
why  we  are  convened  at  an  extraordinary  season,  and  at  great  incon- 
venience and*  cost?  It  is,  forsooth,  that  the  Secretary  guesses  or 
estimates  that,  by  the  1st  of  September,  there  will  be  some  deficit, 
and,  by  the  close  of  the  year,  a  further  small  addition  to  it ;  and,  con- 
sequently, that  it  might  be  prudent  to  provide  for  them  some  months 
in  advance.  Concede  this  mode  of  arguing  to  be  right,  if  the  deficit 
was  certain,  yet  a  session  not  so  early  by  two  months  could  have  been 
soon  enough  to  remove  the  evil,  and  allowed  longer  time  to  complete 
elections.     Besides  this,  the  supposed  deficit  then,  or  at  the  close  of 


STATE    OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  131 

the  year,  is  entirely  uncertain.  It  is  dependent  upon  an  under  estimate 
of  some  receipts,  and  on  a  system  of  premature  expenditures  of  exist- 
ing appropriations,  as  well  as  an  over  estimate  of  others,  to  bring  it 
about,  and  an  addition  to  them  of  new  appropriations,  not  yet  sanc- 
tioned by  Congress. 

Whether  this  deficit,  then,  is  likely  to  happen  under  existing  appro- 
priations, is  a  matter  of  sheer  conjecture,  and  as  to  which  we  have  not 
every  light  which  was  to  be  expected  in  a  communication  which  looks 
so  lucid  to  its  friends  as  this  report.  When  the  Secretary  had  facts 
as  to  the  past  three  months,  concerning  both  their  receipts  and  expend- 
itures, he  gives  us  not  a  syllable  in  relation  to  them.  But  where  he 
had  no  facts  in  relation  to  the  next  three  months,  he  gives  us  many 
hypothetical  calculations  and  guesses,  without  communicating  to  us 
either  the  experience  of  the  past  to  rectify  estimates  of  the  future, 
or  the  grounds  of  what  appears  to  be  one  of  the  most  extraordinary 
attempts  ever  made  to  form  a  deficit  on  paper  which  ought  not  to 
happen. 

I  do  not  mean  to  be  understood  by  this,  that  it  will  not  in  reality 
happen ;  because  a  deficit  can  always  be  made  on  a  distant  day,  when 
the  balance  on  hand  is  small,  and  it  can  easily  be  accomplished  by 
pushing  prematurely  and  lavishly  every  possible  expenditure,  by 
making  hasty  contracts,  and  by  giving  large  advances  to  disbursing 
agents.  But  the  great  inquiry,  in  examining  whether  this  early  session 
is  necessary,  must  be  —  Could  not  a  deficit  well  and  easily  have  been 
avoided,  not  only  in  September,  but  even  till  the  usual  period  of  the 
session  of  Congress,  and  thus  the  country  have  been  saved  all  the  cost, 
inconvenience,  and  other  evils,  incident  to  the  present  meeting  ?  I 
undertake  to  say  that,  on  the  Secretary's  own  showing,  no  deficit  would 
exist  under  any  appropriations  made  before  we  were  summoned,  or 
even  now,  except  to  the  extent  of  one  or  two  millions  of  dollars,  instead 
of  more  than  five  millions,  as  he  computes  it.  Because,  in  order  to 
conjure  up  his  large  deficit,  he  has  to  add,  for  appropriations  not  yet 
made,  the  expenses  of  this  very  session,  and  which  must,  of  course, 
be  justified  by  a  deficit  existing  independent  of  it,  if  at  all.  He  has 
to  add,  also,  other  new  appropriations,  amounting  with  this  to  more 
than  three  millions  of  dollars.  In  this  last  way,  also,  it  must  be  seen, 
there  is  no  trouble,  on  any  occasion,  whenever  a  deficit  is  wanted,  to  fix 
the  time  at  some  distance,  and  call  an  intermediate  session,  and  make 
new  appropriations  enough  to  produce  the  deficit  desired. 

In  this  way,  a  deficit  for  thirteen  or  thirty  millions  can  as  easily  be 
estimated  and  produced  as  one  of  five  millions,  like  that  on  this  occa- 
sion. The  Secretary  may  be  entirely  innocent  of  any  such  views,  and 
may  carelessly  be  pushed  into  this  by  the  importunities  and  plausibil- 
ities of  others  professing  laudable  objects.  But  if  you  calculate  his 
supposed  deficit  on  only  existing  appropriations,  it  dwindles  to  about 
two  millions  on  its  face  ;  and,  as  I  shall  attempt  to  show  hereafter,  if 
deducting  further  manifest  excesses  in  expenditure,  and  adding  mani- 


132  STATE   OF  THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY. 

fest  deficiences  in  receipts,  there  would  be  no  deficit  whatever,  but  a 
balance  of  from  one  to  two  millions  in  the  treasury  on  the  1st  of  Sep- 
tember. To  be  sure,  as  before  remarked,  this  balance  can  be  defeated ; 
but  I  will  demonstrate  that,  if  the  expenditures  have,  since  the  4th  of 
March,  and  shall,  till  the  1st  of  September,  be  kept  down  to  the  usual 
and  proper  amount  on  the  whole  existing  appropriations,  it  would  not 
be  probable,  and  hardly  possible,  to  make  a  deficit. 

As  difficult  would  it  be  found,  also,  to  make  one  for  the  whole  year. 
And  I  go  into  this,  because  some  gentlemen  may  argue  that  it  is  not 
now  too  soon  to  provide  for  one  likely  to  happen  at  any  time  before 
the  year  closes.  Grant,  then,  for  the  sake  of  the  present  examination, 
that  this  last  reasoning  is  plausible ;  and  yet  it  will  be  found,  on  a  little 
scrutiny  of  the  report,  that  there  is  no  more  likelihood  of  any  deficit 
for  the  year  than  for  the  next  three  months,  unless,  as  before  remarked 
in  respect  to  that,  the  Secretary  produces  it  by  unjustifiably  large 
expenditures  on  existing  appropriations,  or  we,  ourselves,  hereafter 
produce  it,  by  our  new  and  additional  appropriations. 

But  before  entering  into  a  critical  examination  of  the  character  and 
amount  of  these  supposed  deficits  hereafter, — none  having  yet  occurred, 
as  both  the  report  and  message  admit, —  let  us  inquire  a  moment 
whether  any  debt  has  occurred  which  is  due,  so  as  to  have  required 
this  early  session.  And,  if  so,  what  is  its  real  amount  under  all  the 
exaggerations  which  have  been  circulated  in  stump  speeches,  and  in 
Congress,  also,  as  well  as  mentioned  in  some  parts  of  this  grave  official 
document.     I  ask  for  proofs  of  the  amount  of  the  debt. 

Gentlemen  here  must  know  well  the  difference  between  a  debt  and 
a  deficit,  though  they  have  often  been  loosely  or  designedly  confounded 
elsewhere.  Thus,  there  may  be  a  debt,  but  no  deficit,  because  the 
debt  is  not  yet  due  or  payable.  Of  course,  it  cannot  help  to  make  a 
deficit,  till  it  become  payable  ;  and  there  can  be  no  necessity  for  con- 
vening Congress  to  pro  vide. for  it  till  it  becomes  due,  or  nearly  due. 
Much  less  is  it  necessary  to  call  an  extraordinary  session,  when  no 
change  as  to  the  amount  or  character  of  the  debt  existing  before  the 
adjournment  of  the  last  Congress,  or  on  the  4th  of  March,  has  taken 
place  since. 

I  aver  that  it  is  not  pretended  by  the  Secretary,  in  the  introductory 
portion  of  his  report,  that  there  was  any  debt  then  payable,  whether 
temporary  or  permanent,  which  he  did  not  possess  ample  means  to  dis- 
charge. What  debt  there  was  consisted  of  treasury  notes,  equalling, 
in  old  and  new,  from  five  to  six  millions ;  and  of  these  not  a  dollar  was 
then  payable  and  demanded,  which  had  not  been  paid.  If  there  had 
been,  he  possessed,  in  order  to  discharge  them,  nearly  six  millions  of 
means  in  money,  and  authority  to  issue  other  notes. 

Nor  were  many  of  them  to  become  payable  by  the  17th  of  March, 
when  we  were  summoned,  nor  by  the  30th  of  May,  when  we  met. 
He  had  more  means  than  were  sufficient  to  discharge  all  which  were 
due  and  presented,  even  before  this  session  began,  and  to  pay  all  other 


STATE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  133 

expenses,  and  have  left  over  two  millions  of  resources,  besides  the  accru- 
ing revenue. 

Thus,  in  the  4th  page  (edition  by  the  House),  he  says  that,  late  as 
the  "  1st  of  June,"  he  had  funds  in  the  treasury,  as  per  statement  C, 
$644,361.16  ;  and  a  power  to  issue  treasury  notes,  authorized  by  the 
act  of  15th  of  February,  1841,  $1,505,943.91.  These  constitute 
existing  means  equal  to  $2,150,305.07. 

There  is  no  pretence,  therefore,  of  any  mere  debt  then  due,  which 
required  tins  early  call  of  Congress.  The  Secretary  himself  denies 
and  refutes  any  such  position,  in  his  first  statements ;  and  as  to  any 
debts  which  might  exist  and  fall  due  next  year,  it  would  have  been  in 
full  season  to  provide  for  them  at  the  regular  session.  Accordingly, 
the  first  syllable  we  hear  in  the  report  about  a  debt  due  is  at  the 
bottom  of  the  third  page,  where  he  so  very  intelligibly,  as  to  the  amount 
of  it  for  the  year  1841,  speaks  of  treasury  notes  "receivable  for  public 
dues  in  the  present  year,  or  payable  in  1842,"  and,  by  means  of  more 
than  six  millions  of  those,  he  adds,  "  making  an  aggregate  of  debts 
and  deficit  to  be  provided  for,  in  this  and  the  ensuing  year,  of  $12,- 
088,215.18."  This  is  very  clear,  I  suppose,  to  his  friends  on  the 
other  side  of  the  House,  as  to  the  amount  of  the  debt  falling  due  in 
1841.  If  so,  how  much  is  it  ?  Will  any  gentleman  favor  us  with 
the  amount  1  None.  Why  ?  Because,  in  truth,  it  does  not  appear 
that  a  dollar  of  it  is  a  debt  due  in  1841.  It  is  confessedly  an  aggre- 
gate made  up,  not  of  debts,  but  of  debt  and  deficit  together ;  and  not 
of  debt  for  1841,  but  of  debt  and  deficit  for  "this  and  the  ensuing 
year."  When  you  analyze  it,  little  doubt  can  exist,  from  the  other 
details  given,  that  most  of  that  part  of  it  consisting  of  debt  does  not 
fall  due  till  1842,  and  could  then  be  early  enough  provided  for,  if  not 
extinguished  before,  by  the  accruing  revenue.  This  meeting  of  Con- 
gress, then,  as  necessary  to  provide  for  a  debt  due  now,  or  even  in 
September,  is  delusive.  This  reason  offered  for  it  by  its  friends  makes 
it  suicidal  —  a  felo  de  se.  But  I  am  willing  to  admit  that  afterwards 
in  the  report,  bearing  on  this  point  of  some  debt  due  in  1841,  the 
Secretary  talks  so  as  to  throw  more  mystery  over  it.  Whether  he 
does  this  through  carelessness  or  otherwise,  the  Senate  must  in  the 
end  judge.  At  the  close  of  the  fourth  page,  when  on  the  previous 
page  he  had  expressly  admitted  that  the  deficit  for  the  whole  year  was 
only  about  six  millions,  —  or,  in  his  own  words,  "  leaving  unprovided 
for,  of  the  demands  for  the  present  year,  the  sum  of  $6,000,941.14," — 
he  observes,  that  he  makes  "an  aggregate"  of  deficit,  for  only  the  next 
three  months,  of  more  than  nine  millions.  This  is  very  extraordinary 
on  its  face,  — that  the  deficit  in  a  quarter  of  a  year  should  be  nine  mil- 
lions, or  greater  than  in  the  whole  year  !  But  it  may  be  possible.  He 
next  adds  a  remark  "as  to  the  mode  of  providing  for  the  above  deficit, 
together  with  the  residue  of  the  existing  public  debt."  He  thus  admits 
and  recognizes,  as  he  did  on  the  other  page,  the  distinction  between 
deficit  and  debt,  and  proceeds  at  once  to  a  computation  of  receipts 
12 


134  STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY. 

and  expenditures  since  1816,  and  more  especially  of  the  last  four 
years,  for  no  justifiable  object  connected  with  this  session,  or  with  the 
fiscal  deficit  and  debt  he  was  considering,  unless  it  was  to  show  a  still 
further  or  larger  deficit  or  debt.  Accordingly,  in  his  conclusions, 
after  the  comparison  is  made,  he  adds,  as  to  the  last  four  years,  that 
"there  appears  an  excess  of  expenditure,  over  the  current  revenue, 
of  $31,310,014.20."  Then,  after  some  words  in  brackets,  he  imme- 
diately says,  "Thus,  and  to  this  extent,  within  the  last  four  years, 
were  the  expenditures  pushed  beyond  the  amount  of  the  revenue." 
He  speaks  next  and  further,  of  being  "  burthened  with  a  debt  incurred 
in  time  of  peace,"  about  augmenting  " that  debt"  of  its  being  an 
"increasing  national  debt,"  and  of  taking  "effectual  measures  to 
prevent  its  further  augmentation." 

Now,  I  ask  gentlemen,  for  information,  if  he  is  not  understood,  by 
some  of  them  here,  to  mean,  by  the  debt,  the  thirty-one  millions  and 
more  he  had  just  been  speaking  of,  as  an  excess  of  expenditures  by  the 
past  administration?  That  sum  immediately  precedes,  and  with  the  nine 
millions  deficit  in  the  three  months,  just  before  named,  would  hold  up 
to  the  country  the  whole  of  the  colossal  debt,  or  " arrearages  of  forty 
millions"  about  which  his  party  had  said  and  sung  so  much  during 
the  preceding  six  months. 

If  all  his  friends  do  not  so  understand  him, — and  his  report  is  praised 
by  them,  as  being  very  "  understandable ,"  — let  me  tell  them  that 
many  of  their  political  faith  do  so  understand  him,  and  are  now,  on  the 
wings  of  the  press,  wafting  to  every  hill  and  valley  in  this  widely 
extended  country  that  this  identical  thirty-one  millions  is  the  debt 
created  by  the  past  administration.  They  say  that  Mr.  Ewing  so 
declares  it  to  be,  that  this  is  what  he  recommends  to  be  funded,  and 
hence  this,  and  the  nine  millions  supposed  deficit,  would  make  all  the 
mammoth  forty  millions  which  had  been  so  often  predicted. 

This  morning,  —  from  several  such  allegations  in  his  own  partisan 
press,  —  one  of  his  ardent  friends,  an  editor  of  long  and  high  standing, 
as  well  as  education,  and  recently  a  State  senator,  sends  to  me  this 
printed  notice  of  this  part  of  the  Treasury  report : 

"From  the  1st  of  January,  1837,  to  the  4th  of  March,  1841,  there  appears  an 
excess  of  expenditures  over  current  revenue  of  THIRTY-ONE  MILLION,  THREE 
HUNDRED  AND  TEN  THOUSAND  DOLLARS." 

Then,  after  a  few  further  remarks,  he  adds  : 

"  This  is  the  national  debt,  —  the  legacy  of  Van  Burenism.  Mr.  Ewing  calls  it 
so  rightly.    He  recommends  that  it  he  funded." 

It  is  remarkable,  that  soon  afterwards,  in  the  report,  is  a  separate 
head,  entitled  "  public  debt"  and  under  it  are  a  page  or  two  of  obser- 
vations ;  but  in  no  part  of  them  does  he  state  the  amount  of  the  public 
debt,  except  as  to  be  inferred  from  this  thirty-one  millions ;  and  the 
readers  of  this  "  readable"  document,  as  his  friends  call  it,  are  flung 


STATE    OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  135 

back  to  this  thirty-one  millions  as  the  true  amount,  which  they  say  he 
recommends  to  be  funded.  At  least,  his  own  political  partisans  out  of 
Congress  say  that  is  the  true  amount,  as  they  understand  him,  and  as 
they,  no  less  than  he,  were  doubtless  very  anxious  to  have  verified. 
Then,  again,  says  another  of  the  modern  whig  presses,  this  very  week, 
referring  to  this  very  report : 

"  There  appears  to  be  a  deficiency  of  revenue  of  about  $11,000,000,  and  a  debt  of 
$31,000,000,  which  may  be  augmented  at  the  close  of  the  year." 

So,  once  more : 

"  Again  :  if  we  are  to  be  relieved  of  the  existing  debt  of  $40,000,000,  there  should 
be  a  further  augmentation  to  the  revenue  of  some  millions,  for  the  purpose  of  gradu- 
ally clearing  off  that  incumbrance." 

And  another : 

"  §W  We  wish  to  confine  the  thoughts  of  all  our  readers  to  one  great  point,  this 
week,  —  the  condition  of  the  United  States  Treasury,  and  the  amount  of  Mr.  Van 
Buren's  national  debt,  his  legacy  to  the  people  —  more  than  thirty-one  millions." 

Another,  going  down  even  to  Mr.  Ewing's  cents,  says  : 

'*  Keep  it  before  the  people, — that  it  is  now  officially  announced,  that  the 
national  debt  incurred  by  Mr.  Van  Buren,  during  the  four  years  of  his  administra- 
tion, amounts  to  thirty-one  millions,  three  hundred  and  ten  thousand,  fourteen 
dollars  and  twenty  cents." 

But  enough,  out  of  a  myriad  of  such  blunders.  This,  then,  is  the 
place,  and  proper  occasion,  to  correct  these  scandalous  errors,  derived 
from  this  very  document,  by  the  Secretary's  own  friends.  I  will 
endeavor  to  set  history  right  on  this  point,  before  I  sit  down.  These 
statements  as  to  the  contents  of  the  report  must  be  either  true  or  false. 
I  ask,  then,  first,  will  Mr.  Ewing's  supporters  on  this  floor  admit  that 
a  single  one  of  these  statements,  made  by  his  and  their  friends,  is  true  ? 
On  the  contrary,  must  they  not  declare  that  their  own  friends,  led  into 
error  by  the  Secretary  himself,  are  publishing  the  foulest  misrepresent- 
ations of  the  truth  !■  If  they  so  declare,  then  let  me  ask,  what  a 
beautiful  illustration  this  collision  and  contradiction  in  their  own  ranks 
furnish  of  the  boasted  clearness  and  accuracy  of  this  report !  for,  if  the 
debt  already  created  be  not  thirty-one  millions,  according  to  Mr. 
Ewing's  views,  as  understood  out  of  Congress,  it  must  be  only  about 
six  millions,  as  that  is  the  only  other  sum,  in  any  other  portion  of 
the  report,  referred  to  by  him  as  the  amount  of  the  debt.  It  would, 
then,  follow,  first,  that  this  document  had  been  drawn  up  with  such 
special  care  and  clearness  as  to  cause  an  impression  among  his  own 
party  different  from  the  truth  in  the  enormous  amount  of  near  twenty- 
five  millions  of  dollars  !  This,  too,  in  a  matter  most  vital  to  our 
present  meeting,  deliberation  and  action,  —  the  amount  of  the  public 
debt  which  we  are  really  requested  to  have  funded.     It  is,  too,  if  a 


136  STATE    OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY. 

mistake,  and  not  intended  to  exhibit  the  thirty-one  millions  as  a  debt, 
a  mistake  which  has  led  some  of  his  friends  to  believe  that  all  the  color- 
ing, exaggerations,  and  calumny,  against  the  past  administration,  for 
having  created  a  debt  of  thirty  to  forty  millions,  was  now  discovered, 
and  proved  by  official  data,  to  be  true  as  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  instead 
of  being  false  as  the  Alcoran. 

But,  on  the  supposition  that  the  Secretary  possibly  did  mean  to  con- 
vey the  idea,  and  does  convey  it  clearly,  as  many  of  his  party  allege, 
that  the  thirty-one  millions  is  the  debt  inherited  from  the  past  admin- 
istration, and  to  be  now  "funded"  let  us  examine,  for  a  moment,  the 
base  and  shallow  pretences  for  such  an  idea.  We  shall,  at  least,  do 
one  benefit  by  it,  if  successful.  We  shall  force  his  friends  here  to 
admit  that  there  is  no  such  debt,  and  that,  for  political  purposes,  a  vile 
and  monstrous  exaggeration  has  been  resorted  to  by  their  own  party. 

If  this  thirty-one  millions  be  a  debt,  to  whom,  then,  are  we  to  issue 
the  scrip  or  certificates  of  stock,  when  it  is  funded,  under  the  funding 
schemes  of  the  new  dynasty  1  Of  the  whole  amount,  one  item  of  near 
nine  millions  is  money  collected  chiefly  from  the  United  States  Bank, 
on  account  of  the  capital  we  formerly  owned  there.  Is  this  nine  mil- 
lions a  debt  we  owe,  when  we  have  merely  collected  that  amount  from 
our  creditors  ?  If  so,  to  whom  do  we  owe  it,  and  why  ?  With  a 
change  in  our  political  dynasty  friendly  to  a  United  States  Bank,  are 
we  to  be  called  on  to  refund  to  that  bank  all  our  capital  we  have  col- 
lected, and  thus  generously  to  aid  that  distressed  and  unfortunate 
corporation,  as  we  propose  to  aid  most  of  the  rest  of  creation,  though 
pretended  by  our  opponents  that  we  ourselves,  the  General  Govern- 
ment, have  been  left  in  the  most  pitiable  and  embarrassed  condition  1 

This  is  one  of  the  greatest  humbugs  in  this  age  of  humbugs,  to  pre- 
tend that  a  dollar  of  this  nine  millions  is  a  debt  we  owe  to  anybody,  or 
which  should  be  funded. 

The  thirty-one  millions  is,  then,  reduced  to  twenty-two.  But,  mixed 
up  in  another  item  of  about  seventeen  millions,  is  a  balance  of  money 
of  near  eight  millions,  which  was  in  the  treasury  on  the  first  of  Jan- 
uary, 1837,  which  has  been  expended,  as  it  should  be,  on  objects 
directed  by  Congress.  Is  that  a  debt  1  If  so,  to  whom  1  Who  shall 
have  the  stock  for  it  ?  This  is  quite  too  ridiculous  for  argument,  — that 
we  are  to  fund  and  pay  as'  a  debt,  to  some  unknown  somebody,  seven 
millions  of  dollars,  which  belonged  to  ourselves,  and  for  which  we  do 
not  now  owe,  and  never  did  owe,  a  cent ! 

This  leaves  only  fifteen  millions,  or  not  half  of  the  mighty  thirty- 
one.  But,  of  that  fifteen,  over  nine  millions  is  confessedly  the  fourth 
instalment.  Is  that  a  debt  we  owe  1  A  debt  for  what  1  What  prop- 
erty did  we  get  for  it ;  and  from  whom  1  No.  It  will  do  to  talk  at 
ale-houses  and  political  log-cabins  about  our  owing  the  States  this  last 
nine  millions.  But  it  is  a  little  too  much  for  a  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  to  countenance  such  an  idea,  — a  Secretary  who  had  the  sol- 
emn laws  of  the  twenty-six  States  before  him,  and  their  receipts, 


STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY.  137 

showing  that  all  the  instalments  were  to  be  considered  as  money 
belonging  still  to  the  United  States,  and  not  to  the  States.  That, 
instead  of  owing  them  the  fourth  instalment,  as  a  debt,  they  owed  us 
all  the  three  others,  and  were  liable,  and  had  engaged  to  return  them 
whenever  required.  That  the  transaction  was  expressly  and  deliber- 
ately agreed  to  be  a  mere  deposit  temporarily,  to  be  returned  when 
needed,  and  not  even  a  gift  outright,  and  much  less  a  debt  owing  by 
us.  Much  less  could  it  even  be  pretended,  by  any  intelligent  financier, 
that  the  United  States,  by  using  the  fourth  instalment,  their  own 
money,  and  for  their  own  public  purposes,  thereby  incurred  any  debt 
to  the  States. 

All  of  the  whole  thirty-one  millions,  as  a  debt,  then,  after  deduct- 
ing this,  dwindles  to  between  four  and  six  millions. 

The  inflated  balloon,  so  large  with  party  gas,  thus  pricked,  collapses, 
and  leaves  nothing  but  the  comparatively  small  amount  of  debt  named 
in  another  portion  of  the  report,  and  there  named  as  not  due  now,  but 
in  the  ensuing  year. 

What  a  miserable  abortion  or  pretence  there  is,  then,  in  all  this 
thirty-one  millions,  for  any  debt  now  due,  so  as  to  justify  this  early 
session !  This  scrutiny  shows  also  the  carelessness,  and  originality,  at 
least,  of  a  fiscal  officer  having  a  whole  head  of  his  report  devoted  to 
the  "  public  debt,"  and  yet,  in  no  part  of  the  information  given  under 
that  head,  stating  the  amount  of  this  public  debt.  Was  ever  such  wis- 
dom exhibited  before  ?  And  I  now  ask  any  gentleman,  on  the  other 
side,  to  inform  me,  from  any  part  of  his  report,  how  much  public  debt 
the  Secretary  means  to  state  has  been  caused  by  the  appropriations 
under  the  past  administration  ;  and  how  much  by  new  appropriations, 
and  his  new  "Fiscal  Bank"  scheme,  under  the  present  administration? 

But  one  or  two  minutes  longer  as  to  this  large  item  of  thirty-one 
millions.  Why  was  it  dragged  in  so  awkwardly  in  respect  to  this 
session,  unless  it  was  meant  to  convey  an  impression  to  cursory  readers 
that  a  debt  to  this  extent  had  been  created  by  the  past  administration '? 
It  had  some  object.  Was  it,  then,  the  mere  partisan  object  of  holding 
up  the  preceding  administration  as  extravagant  and  odious  ?  If  so,  I 
am  ready  to  prove,  from  official  documents  in  the  Secretary's  own 
office,  that  he  was  conveying  an  impression  which  he  knew,  or  was 
bound  to  know,  to  be  utterly  groundless. 

Thus,  in  document  No.  497,  of  the  Senate,  at  the  twenty-fifth 
Congress,  second  session,  it  is  reported  from  the  treasury  depart- 
ment, that  the  appropriations  made  by  Congress  exceeded  those  asked 
in  the  annual  estimates  over  nineteen  millions,  and  in  1837  they 
exceeded  them  over  seventeen  millions,  making  an  aggregate  of  thirty- 
six  millions  of  excess.  Now,  none  of  those  passed  in  1837  had  been 
made  or  expended  on  the  1st  of  January,  1837,  and  probably  none  of 
the  former  ones,  being  made  mostly  in  July  previous,  had  been 
expended  beyond  the  sum  of  four  or  five  millions.  There  was,  then, 
imposed  on  this  four  years,  from  1837  to  1841,  outstanding  appro- 
12* 


138  STATE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY. 

priations,  beyond  the  estimates,  equal  to  this  whole  thirty-one  millions, 
and  which,  though  it  or  its  predecessor  never  called  for  them,  it  was 
compelled  by  Congress  to  expend  beyond  the  ordinary  appropriations 
called  for  and  outstanding.  Yet  to  spend  this  excess  is  now  imputed 
to  it  as  extravagance  and  waste,  by  some  of  the  very  persons  in  the 
opposition  who  were  foremost  and  eager  to  break  down  the  treasury 
with  them. 

Again :  by  another  document,  No.  450  of  the  Senate,  twenty-sixth 
Congress,  first  session,  it  appears,  that  in  these  four  years  more 
extraordinary  and  temporary  appropriations  were  required  by  Congress 
to  be  expended  than  was  the  average  of  the  two  previous  presidential 
terms  by  the  whole  amount  of  this  thirty-one  millions,  and  quite 
forty-six  millions  more  than  in  the  presidential  term  of  the  younger 
Adams.  Yet  it  is  now  charged  upon  Mr.  Van  Buren  and  his  friends, 
by  those  who  moved  and  advocated  many  of  those  extra  and  tem- 
porary appropriations,  that  the  balance  of  only  thirty-one  millions  of 
excess  in  his  expenditures  over  the  receipts  is  evidence  of  his  want  of 
economy.  A  want  of  economy  for  a  balance  against  him  of  thirty-one 
millions,  when  they  compelled  him  to  expend  quite  forty-six  millions 
more  than  were  imposed  on  their  own  administration. 

Nor  was  this  period  "a  time  of  peace,"  as  the  Secretary  states; 
but  it  was  burdened  with  one  of  the  most  expensive  and  bloody  Indian 
wars  that  has  ever  ravaged  our  frontier. 

Again :  look  at  the  other  side,  to  the  receipts  in  this  period,  from 
1837  to  1840.  The  executive  cannot  increase  or  diminish  the  receipts, 
except  sometimes  from  lands,  by  many  or  few  advertisements.  But 
Congress  can.  In  those  years  the  tariff  had  become  lessened  by  Con- 
gress itself,  under  a  biennial  reduction.  Was  the  past  administration 
culpable  for  that,  when  the  measure  originated  before  it  came  into 
power  ?  Over  forty  millions  of  revenue,  which  would  otherwise  have 
accrued,  had  also  been  relinquished  and  reduced  by  the  alteration  in 
the  tariff  of  1832  and  1833.  Added  to  this,  the  Secretary  has  seized 
on  a  period  for  his  comparison  when  most  extraordinary  revulsions 
had  begun  in  the  commercial  world,  lessening,  and  almost  entirely  for 
a  time  paralyzing,  all  revenue.  Was  this  very  period  picked  out  on 
that  very  account  1  Had  the  Secretary  intended  to  draw  a  fair  com- 
parison of  the  receipts  and  expenditures,  after  a  great  civil  revolution, 
like  the  accession  of  General  Jackson  in  1829,  or  a  great  event  in  the 
monetary  concerns  of  the  country,  like  the  removal  of  the  deposites  in 
1833,  it  would  have  been  natural  and  proper  to  take  these  dates,  and 
not  1837.  Those  two  eras  of  ruin,  in  the  view  of  most  gentlemen  on 
the  other  side,  were  a  sort  of  Hegira  in  their  political  chronology,  and 
the  results  would  have  been  useful;  but  they  would  not  have  answered 
the  purpose  of  conveying  to  the  world  an  impression  of  great  compar- 
ative expense  over  the  receipts,  and  hence  of  great  supposed  wasteful- 
ness. Thus,  by  document  No.  212,  Senate,  25th  Congress,  3d 
session,  and  the  annual  reports  since  in  the  finances,  it  can  be  seen 


STATE    OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  139 

that  from  1829  to  1840,  when  the  country  was  ruined  by  General 
Jackson  and  Mr.  Van  Buren,  the  receipts  exceeded  the  expendi- 
tures, instead  of  the  reverse,  by  quite  fourteen  millions  of  dollars ; 
and  from  1833  to  1840,  by  quite  three  millions ;  and  from  1829  to 
1837,  by  forty  millions.  Again :  if  gentlemen  would  devolve  on 
1837  the  money  then  on  hand,  since  deposited  with  the  States  to  the 
extent  of  twenty-eight  millions,  and  the  balance  of  near  seven  millions 
left  beside  in  the  treasury,  as  well  as  devolve  on  1837  all  the  excess- 
ive outstanding  appropriations  made  in  1836-7,  above  what  the 
estimates  called  for,  this  alone  would  not  only  square  the  accounts, 
but  leave  seven  millions  balance  in  favor  of  the  past  administration. 
Such  and  so  groundless  are  some  of  the  obsolete  charges  now 
vamped  up  and  newly  varnished  by  the  Secretary  against  his  prede- 
cessors. 

I  take  great  pleasure  in  finding,  that  in  the  financial  parts  of  the 
President's  message,  he  has  too  much  tact  to  allude  at  all  to  this 
thirty-one  millions.  He  does  not  treat  of  its  extraordinary  items  as  a 
debt,  or  deficit,  or  evidence  of  extravagance.  But  he  should  have 
done  it,  were  they  either  of  the  former.  He  knew  better,  and  he  did 
better.  He,  too,  shows  the  judgment  and  good  sense  to  extract 
nothing  about  this  four  millions  surplus  from  "the  report  of  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury"  to  which  he  expressly  refers  us  (p.  30) 
as  having  seen,  and  as  furnishing  the  data  of  his  own  fiscal  exhibits. 

But  gentlemen  may  argue  that,  in  another  portion  of  the  report,  it 
is  shown  that  over  thirty-three  millions  of  appropriations  were  out- 
standing on  the  4th  of  March,  and  that  this  is  prima  facie  evidence, 
either  of  a  great  debt-  to  near  that  amount,  or  of  great  arrearages. 
Such  sage  arguments  have  heretofore  been  used  to  reach  similar  con- 
clusions by  our  opponents,  and  they  are  likely  to  be  again.  Even  the 
report  seems  to  give  some  countenance  to  such  an  impression,  by 
swelling  the  aggregate  of  appropriations  by  the  addition  of  all  the 
treasury  notes,  and  giving  no  explanations  how  short  a  time  the  great 
mass  of  these  outstanding  appropriations  had  been  passed.  It  is  there- 
fore necessary  to  scrutinize  them  a  single  moment.  First,  then, 
including  only  the  appropriations  for  ordinary  expenditures,  exclusive 
of  any  debt  or  treasury  notes,  which  is  the  customary  mode  of  stating 
outstanding  appropriations,  and  the  aggregate  was  only  about  twenty- 
eight  millions,  instead  of  thirty-three  millions. 

Again :  it  is  a  recorded  fact,  in  an  exhibit  published  by  an  officer 
of  this  body,  and  which  I  hold  in  my  hand,  that  near  eighteen  millions 
and  a  third  of  those  twenty-eight  had  been  appropriated,  or  become 
chargeable,  during  the  recent  session,  at  the  heel  of  it,  and  most  of 
them  within  even  three  days  of  the  4th  of  March. 

Yet,  without  any  such  explanation,  they  are  sent  out  to  the  world, 
by  Mr.  Ewing,  in  a  form  calculated  to  create  an  impression  with  many 
that  the  whole  thirty-three  millions  were  old  arrearages,  or  old  debts, 
or  evidence  of  one  of  them.     But,  on  a  scrutiny,  it  appears  that  only 


140  STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY. 

from  nine  to  ten  millions  of  the  whole  thirty-three  then  remained  as 
old  appropriations,  exclusive  of  treasury  notes,  which  is  no  larger  a 
sum  than  the  Secretary  proposes  to  leave  at  the  end  of  the  present 
year.  Nor,  on  the  other  hand,  is  nine  millions  any  larger,  if  so  large 
a  sum,  as  it  has  been  customary  for  a  long  time  to  have  outstanding 
at  the  end  of  the  year.  Nor  is  it  evidence  of  a  dollar  of  debt 
or  arrearage. 

Thus  vanishes  another  of  the  wretched  fabrics  for  an  existing  debt 
or  arrearage  of  thirty-three  or  forty  millions.  Indeed,  the  out- 
standing appropriations  at  the  end  of  a  year  have  at  times  been  as 
high  as  fifteen  or  sixteen  millions,  without  usually  including  anything 
for  the  debt.  They  have  been  so  in  1836  and  1837,  but  by  1839 
were  reduced  to  about  thirteen  millions,  and  last  year,  at  the  close  of 
it,  were  not  far  from  twelve  millions.  Part  of  the  reduction  has  been 
always  caused  by  carrying  some  of  them  to  the  surplus  fund,  and  one 
year  from  two  to  three  millions.  But,  independent  of  that,  the  Secre- 
tary now,  by  his  estimates,  would  reduce  them  at  once  three  or  four 
millions,  independent  of  the  surplus  fund,  and  by  large  expenditures 
alone,  being  thus  nearly  three  or  four  millions  more  than  it  has  been 
usual  to  reduce  them  in  that  way. 

This  is  without  any  explanations,  and  hence  inscrutable  on  any 
common  principle.  But  one  other  fallacious  position  on  this  topic  in 
the  report,  and  I  have  done  with  the  supposed  debt.  It  has  been  and 
may  be  again  argued,  that  at  least  the  sixteen  millions  and  a  fraction, 
estimated  as  a  deficit  by  the  Secretary  at  the  close  of  the  year,  must 
and  should  be  regarded  virtually  as  a  debt  of  the  past  administration ; 
and  hence,  if  the  debt  was  not  forty  millions,  or  thirty-one  or  thirty- 
three, — handed  over,  in  their  language,  as  "  the  legacy  of  Van  Buren- 
ism"  to  the  present  administration  on  the  4th  of  March, — it  was 
at  least  sixteen  millions.  But  will  gentlemen  use  their  eyes  and  com- 
mon sense  a  moment,  on  this  point  ?  Let  us  examine  the  items  of  this 
$16,088,215.18,  which  the  Secretary  computes  to  be  an  "  estimated 
deficit,"  with  such  apparent  exactness  as  to  go  down  even  to  cents  — 
to  eighteen  cents  in  a  mere  estimate,  and  that  one  involving  the  sum 
of  sixteen  millions.  I  do  not  object  to  great  exactness  in  past  expend- 
itures, which,  of  course,  are  known,  and  can,  and  perhaps  may. 
properly  enough,  in  fiscal  exhibits,  be  stated  in  cents,  when  they 
exist.  But  this  pretension  to  such  minute  accuracy  in  an  estimated 
deficit  is  a  little  too  bad;  and  more  especially  in  a  document  so 
abounding  in  large  errors  and  numerous  discrepancies  in  its  estimates 
and  statements,  even  to  the  extent  of  several  millions.  But  the 
Secretary  may  be  entitled  to  some  indulgence,  on  this  score  of  using 
cents  in  his  estimates,  on  account  of  the  example  probably  set  him  by 
the  estimates  for  civil  foreign  intercourse,  &c,  some  of  them  coming 
from  his  superior  officer  in  the  State  department,  and,  for  aught  I 
know,  the  consequence  of  the  well-known  vigilance  and  care  in  money 
matters  which  distinguish  the  Secretaries,  whether  upper  or  under, 


STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY.  141 

in  that  department.  Of  the  items  which  constitute  this  sixteen  mil- 
lions, the  last  one,  of  four  millions,  has  never  yet  been  even  appro- 
priated, and  is,  of  course,  not  due  as  a  debt  to  anybody. 

It  is  merely  four  millions  which  the  Secretary  wishes  to  have  author- 
ized as  a  surplus  in  the  treasury,  and  which,  of  course,  on  the  repeal 
of  the  sub-treasury,  which  he  recommends,  and  which  gentlemen  have 
already  voted  for,  is  to  be  placed  in  the  broken  State  banks,  to  be 
loaned  and  banked  on  without  interest  to  us  ;  and  this  at  our  expense, 
as  we  shall  be  obliged  to  borrow  it  for  them,  and  pay  interest  on  the 
loan,  or  it  will  be  placed  in  the  same  way,  and  for  the  same  purpose, 
in  the  new  " fiscal"  or  treasury  or  government  bank,  at  the  fancied 
idea  of  which  our  opponents  last  year  had  such  horrors. 

But  what  a  shallow  pretence  it  is,  that  this  four  millions,  or  any  part 
of  it,  is  now,  or  was  last  March,  a  debt !  Deduct  it,  and  the  twelve 
millions  remaining  is  the  sum  formerly  referred  to,  about  six  of  which 
the  Secretary  admits  not  to  be  a  debt  due  last  March,  or  even  in  this 
year ;  and  the  other  six  is  half  of  it,  at  least,  as  I  shall  soon  explain 
in  detail,  manufactured  from  new  and  additional  appropriations  now 
requested,  but  which  had  not  passed  last  March,  nor  do  they  even 
now  exist,  except  on  paper,  and  in  imagination  and  hope. 

The  other  three,  without  now  dwelling  on  other  particulars,  are 
more  than  all  counterbalanced  by  the  over-estimate  of  expenditures 
under  existing  appropriations.  Thus,  in  brief,  for  example,  the  new 
and  permanent  appropriations  for  this  year  were,  as  before  explained, 
but  eighteen  millions  and  a  third,  and,  by  a  table  annexed  to  the  Sec- 
retary's own  report,  were  under  that  sum.  On  this  amount  the 
expenditures,  by  the  practice  and  usage  for  almost  all  time  since  this 
government  began,  would  be  such  as  to  leave,  at  the  end  of  the  year, 
about  the  same  amount  unexpended  as  is  spent  of  the  old  or  former 
appropriation.  In  this  way,  the  whole  expenditure  in  any  year  nearly 
equals  just  about  the  aggregate  of  the  new  and  permanent  appropria- 
tions. 

The  Secretary,  then,  ought  to  spend,  for  the  current  service  in  1841, 
only  about  eighteen  to  nineteen  millions,  when  he  proposes  to  spend 
for  it  over  twenty-three  millions,  or  an  excess  of  four  to  five  millions, 
and  considerably  beyond  all  which  remains  of  the  computed  debt  or 
deficit  of  sixteen  millions. 

If,  to  cover  some  contingencies  and  fluctuations,  the  expenditure 
might  go  to  twenty  millions,  and  that  be  deemed  the  maximum,  and 
which  was  the  maximum  in  the  annual  report  last  December,  the 
excess  proposed  by  the  Secretary  would  still  be  more  than  three  mil- 
lions, and  alone  would  absorb  all  the  balance  of  the  sixteen. 

I  concede,  however,  that  by  pushing  the  expenditures  hastily  and 
inconsiderately,  in  every  quarter  of  the  country,  to  aid  this  object  or 
that, —  this  or  that  individual, —  and  that  by  making  large  and  prema- 
ture advances,  the  expenditures  may,  in  truth,  be  thus  inflamed  or 
augmented.     But  I  do  say,  that  if  this  should  unfortunately  prove  to 


142  STATE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY. 

be  the  result,  it  will  grow  out  of  a  departure  from  long  usages,  and,  I 
fear,  be  a  violation  of  what  is  due  to  the  public  interests,  more  especially 
in  the  straitened  condition  of  our  fiscal  affairs. 

Thus,  then,  disappears  all  pretence  of  any  debt  due  this  year, 
beyond  our  means  under  the  aggregate  of  sixteen  millions.  What, 
then,  is  the  real  debt  already  created  1  What  part  of  it  is  to  fall  due 
this  year,  and  what  the  next  ?  And  what  amount  of  additional  debt  does 
the  new  administration  recommend  to  be  created,  for  its  own  appropri- 
ations and  bank  capital,  the  present  year  ?  Seriously  is  this  informa- 
tion desired,  —  and  will  any  of  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means  give 
it  to  me  ?  No :  either  they  cannot  ascertain  it  satisfactorily  from  the 
report,  or  the  results  would  not  be  very  flattering  to  the  comparison,  as 
to  economy  and  extravagance,  between  the  two  administrations. 

Will  they  include  for  this  administration  the  Secretary's  new  sur- 
plus of  four  millions  1  Will  they  include  the  fourth  instalment,  or 
not,  and  borrow,  or  not,  nine  or  ten  millions  for  that  which  the  Sec- 
retary, in  his  new  bank  project,  says,  most  unadvisedly  and  erro- 
neously has  already  been  '-appropriated"?  Will  they  include  six 
milhons  more,  which  he  recommends  unconditionally,  to  aid  in  estab- 
lishing the  capital  of  a  new  national  bank  1  and  five  millions  more  still, 
in  case  individuals  do  not  subscribe  enough?  Will  they  include  three 
milhons  more,  for  what  they  give  away  from  the  public  lands  to  the 
States?  and  three  more,  for  their  new  appropriations  for  the  war 
department,  extra  session,  and  census  ? 

This  is  a  very  modest  aggregate  of  debt  apparently  requested,  equal- 
ling at  least  thirty  milhons,  connected  with  measures  of  the  new  reform 
and  economical  administration ;  while,  for  the  past  extravagant  admin- 
istration, there  should  not  be,  at  the  utmost,  both  this  and  the  next 
year,  but  from  four  to  six  millions. 

Now,  am  I  right  in  these  inferences  from  the  report  itself, —  and  how 
much  of  this  saving  and  reforming  policy  will  Congress  approve  ?  That 
is  the  important  inquiry.  What  did  the  President,  too,  think  should 
be  authorized,  for  all  these  purposes  ?  And  what  aggregate  do  either 
of  them,  in  reality,  mean  you  shall  fund  for  all  these  purposes  ?  The 
country  is  faint  with  expectation  to  know  something  certain  and  intel- 
ligible of  the  views  of  their  highest  officers  on  such  a  momentous  meas- 
ure to  them  and  their  children, —  a  measure  which  certainly  tends, 
however  designed,  to  mortgage,  to  British  capitalists,  their  workshops, 
farms,  and  firesides,  for  ages,  and  render  us  all  mere  hewers  of  ivood 
and  drawers  of  water  to  our  ancient  oppressors. 

On  the  contrary,  that  I  am  right  in  respect  to  the  delusive  preju- 
dice which  has  been  got  up  against  the  past  administration  for  a  debt 
of  forty  milhons,  or  even  thirty,  or  twenty,  or  ten,  another  course  of 
reasoning,  and  a  little  exercise  of  plain,  practical  sense,  will  demon- 
strate. A  nation  is  like  an  individual,  in  these  respects.  What  is  the 
debt  of  any  man,  on  any  given  day  ?  It  must  be  the  amount  of  admit- 
ted claims  which  others  hold  against  him,  unsatisfied.     But  others  held 


STATE    OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  143 

against  the  United  States,  on  the  first  of  this  year,  only  about  four  and 
a  half  millions  due  of  treasury  notes  ;  and  on  the  4th  of  March,  only 
between  five  and  six  millions,  and  a  considerable  portion  of  this  not 
payable  till  another  year.  This  is  the  whole  mystery  and  wonder,  in  a 
nutshell.  Before  this  year  ends,  the  debt  on  the  existing  appropria- 
tions is  more  likely  to  be  reduced  than  increased ;  because,  of  the 
appropriations  outstanding,  there  were  several  millions  less,  instead  of 
more,  than  in  several  years  immediately  prior,  and  the  expenses  under 
them  were  satisfied  as  fully  as  usual,  or  your  table  would  have  been 
loaded  with  the  clamorous  complaints  of  creditors  asking  relief.  This 
is  the  unvarnished  tale  —  the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but 
the  truth.  Stump  orators  and  legislators  can  talk  themselves  hoarse 
as  to  details,  and  not  change  a  figure  of  this  result  upon  general  data, 
intelligible  to  the  most  common  capacity. 

Much  has  been  said  of  the  enormous  payments  made  to  redeem 
treasury  notes.  But  that  is  evidence  of  ample  means,  if  as  many  new 
notes  are  not  issued,  and  not  of  extravagance,  in  any  case,  if  the  new 
issues  do  not  go  far  beyond  the  amount  redeemed.  Thus,  in  the  last 
four  years,  if  mingling,  like  the  Secretary,  the  redemption  of  treasury 
notes  with  common  expenses,  and  thus  increasing  the  apparent  extrav- 
agance several  millions,  anybody  could  and  would  have  made  that 
administration  appear  to  have  spent  thirty  or  forty  millions  more  than 
it  really  did.  And  yet,  in  the  whole  period,  up  to  the  1st  of  January, 
it  did  not  owe  an  amount  of  treasury  notes,  for  the  whole  time,  more 
than  about  four  and  a  half  millions.  The  aggregate  has  been  swollen 
merely  by  the  issue  of  new  ones  for  old  ones,  in  most  cases  without 
increasing  the  real  expenses,  or  the  real  debt. 

Stripping  off  party  disguises  and  ignorant  misconceptions,  such  are 
believed  to  be  the  true  views  of  this  interesting  subject,  —  a  subject 
which,  in  this  respect,  is  made  the  theme  of  the  grossest  carelessness, 
if  not  mistake ;  and  which,  by  bad  juxtaposition  of  statements,  by 
omissions  and  mystification,  has  led  the  Secretary's  own  friends,  all 
over  the  country,  to  quote  him  as  authority  for  the  flagrant  calumny 
on  his  predecessors,  that  they  have  left  the  treasury  burdened  with  a 
debt  of  thirty-one  millions,  at  least,  if  not  forty;  when,  in  other 
places,  he  is  found  to  admit  that  it  is  only  about  six  millions,  and  most 
of  that  not  due  till  next  year, —  all  of  it  temporary,  and  all  of  it  likely 
to  have  been  extinguished  before  December,  if  the  conduct  of  the 
United  States  Bank,  since  the  1st  of  January  last,  had  not  been  such, 
and  with  such  developments,  as  to  cover  large  portions  of  the  country 
with  ruin,  paralyze  business,  injure  American  credit,  for  a  time,  at 
home  and  abroad,  and  thus  reduce  largely  our  revenue  from  foreign 
commerce. 

I  shall  next  proceed  to  inquire  into  the  estimates  and  calculations, 
in  detail,  by  which  the  Secretary  arrives  at  the  conclusion  of  a  large 
deficit  for  the  year,  and  then  for  the  ensuing  three  months,  which  it 
was  necessary  to  provide  for  in  so  early  and  extraordinary  a  manner. 


144  STATE   OF  THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY. 

And,  first,  let  me  ask  if  there  be  no  important  omissions  in  the  report 
of  what  is  useful  to  decide  correctly  in  this  inquiry,  and  which  ought 
to  be  supplied  before  printing  extra  copies  of  it,  or  acting  on  its  recom- 
mendations? It  omits  entirely  the  statement  of  the  actual  receipts  and 
expenditures  of  the  past  three  months,  which  were  facts  and  certain, 
and  bearing  directly  on  the  opinions  that  should  be  formed  of  the  next 
three,  while  it  computes  a  deficit  for  the  next  three,  in  mere  estimates, 
or  conjectures,  which  are  entirely  uncertain.  It  next  omits  any  state- 
ment, substantive  and  separate,  of  the  whole  computed  expenditures 
under  existing  appropriations,  exclusive  of  the  debt,  either  for  the 
whole  of  the  year  1841,  or  for  the  part  of  it  after  our  opponents  came 
into  power  on  the  4th  of  March,  or  for  the  ensuing  three  months. 
These  statements  would  have  been  natural,  and  would  have  removed 
much  doubt  that  now  exists,  in  this  document,  on  some  of  these  import- 
ant points.  Equally  useful  and  desirable  would  it  have  been  to  see 
a  statement  of  the  amount  of  debt  which  he  supposes  would  be  due, 
under  existing  appropriations,  at  the  end  of  the  next  three  months  and 
at  the  end  of  the  year ;  as,  also,  in  conformity  to  opinions  just  ex- 
pressed by  me,  the  amount  which  he  has  recommended  to  be  created 
this  year,  under  new  appropriations  yet  to  be  passed,  whether  for  the 
ordinary  session,  or  for  capital  to  a  fiscal  bank,  or  any  other  object. 

Why  have  all  these  important  results  been  left  uncomputed,  and 
either  entirely  omitted,  or  so  mixed  up  and  confused  with  other  matter 
that  it  would  puzzle  a  sphinx  to  unriddle  them  to  the  satisfaction  of 
every  one,  even  of  our  opponents  1  If  it  does  not,  will  any  of  them,  or 
any  one  of  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means,  now  state  to  me  what 
they  suppose  his  opinions  to  be  on  either  of  these  points,  either  judging 
from  the  report,  or  from  personal  communication?  They  are  data 
much  needed  to  facilitate  forming  a  judgment  on  the  correctness  of 
some  of  his  other  computations.     None  can  give  them. 

Let  us,  then,  examine  what  we  have  got  on  the  amount  of  those 
supposed  deficits,  and  see  what  appears  to  be  its  character, —  whether 
fully  reliable,  or  otherwise.  Are  all  the  sums  on  which  his  calcula- 
tions rest  stated  accurately  by  him  and  the  President, —  the  latter,  of 
course,  taking  his  data  from  the  former  ?  Are  there  no  material  mis- 
takes appearing  on  the  face  of  the  report  and  message,  in  matters  con- 
nected with  the  deficit,  as  well  as  some  of  the  general  estimates  and 
general  conclusions  ?  I  speak  not  now  of  the  mistakes,  perhaps,  in 
addition,  or  in  printing,  of  quite  a  million  in  two  places,  nor  of  sums 
repeated  and  doubled ;  for  such  mistakes,  as  before  remarked,  may  be 
entirely  clerical,  or  typographical,  and  are  not  to  be  treated  with  harsh- 
ness. But  how  is  it  as  to  other  and  material  errors,  that  cannot,  in 
the  nature  of  things,  have  any  such  apology,  and  that  bear  directly  on 
the  examination  before  us?  Thus,  in  the  first  place  (2d  page),  the 
Secretary  gives  the  balance  of  money  on  hand  which  he  started  with 
on  the  4th  of  March,  and  which  is  one  of  his  means  to  prevent  a 
deficit.     He  states  it  at  $572,718  ;  but,  on  the  third  page,  he  states  it 


STATE    OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  145 

at  $646,803,  or  a  difference  of  $74,085;  while  he  gives  the  balance 
to  the  President,  who  says  (3d  page)  that  he  gets  it  "from  the  report 
of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury"  at  a  third  amount,  different  still, 
viz.,  $645,000. 

Some  explanation  can  perhaps  be  attempted  for  some  of  the  differ- 
ences, but  it  will  be  rather  difficult  to  show  that  each  of  the  three  dif- 
ferent balances,  and  all  of  them,  can  be  correct.  Certainly  one  of 
them,  which  is  said  to  be  taken  from  the  Secretary's  report,  is  not  in 
the  report  now ;  and  it  cannot  be  pretended  that  any  of  them  relate  to 
different  times,  as  each  expressly  refers  to  the  4th  day  of  March. 

Again :  the  Secretary  makes  the  deficit  for  this  year  —  a  most  im- 
portant inquiry  —  to  be  $6,000,941,  while  the  President  has  a  state- 
ment to  show  it  to  be  $11,406,000,  or  a  difference  of  $5,406,059. 
These,  also,  refer  to  the  same  date  or  period.  But  if  this  error  be 
admitted,  and  an  explanation  be  offered  that  the  President  meant  to 
include  the  debt  not  due  till  another  year,  but  created  in  1841,  and 
omitted  to  be  properly  described,  then  this  will  be  only  exchanging  one 
error  for  another,  because  the  Secretary  pronounces  that  debt  and 
deficit  to  be  $12,088,215,  which  is  still  a  difference  of  $682,215  from 
the  President.  The  items  of  the  President,  also,  on  this  point,  pre- 
sent still  a  third  error,  as  they  show  a  deficit  of  only  $9,540,000,  includ- 
ing treasury  notes,  or  his  difference  from  his  aggregate  statement  of 
$1,866,000.  Of  this,  I  can  imagine  no  explanation,  which  does  not 
end  in  a  new  difference  or  blunder.  The  Secretary  says,  again,  that 
there  will  be  required,  from  the  1st  of  June  to  the  31st  of  August, 
"  for  the  payment  of  treasury  notes  which  will  fall  due  within  that 
time,  and  the  interest  thereon,  about  $2,756,900."  This  is  one  of 
the  essential  items  to  create  his  deficit.  But  the  President,  in  his 
message,  under  date  of  the  1st  of  June,  and  of  course  covering  exactly 
the  same  period  to  a  day,  says,  "  There  will  fall  due,  within  the  next 
three  months,  treasury  notes  of  the  issues  of  1840,  including  interest, 
about  $2,850,000."  This  makes  a  discrepancy  of  $93,100.  There 
is  no  mistake  in  additions,  or  by  clerks,  and  no  different  dates,  but  the 
same  period  embraced  explicitly  in  both  statements. 

Again :  the  Secretary  estimates  the  expenses  for  the  next  three 
months  —  a  most  material  point  —  at  $11,151,693,  while  the  Presi- 
dent is  led  to  make  them  $11,340,000  ;  and  he  explicitly  adopts  the 
same  three  months,  from  the  1st  of  June  to  the  last  of  August.  This 
is  a  difference  of  $188,307;  and  he  makes  another  and  second  error 
here,  in  stating  or  putting  his  items  together,  of  quite  $96,000,  as  those 
stated  equal  only  $11,244,000.  I  can  divine  no  possible  explanation 
for  this,  as  it  relates  to  expenditures,  and  not  to  receipts.  The  next  and 
last  mistake,  in  figures,  on  the  face  of  the  report  and  message,  which  I 
shall  notice,  is  in  the  aggregate  of  the  imputed  deficit  at  the  end  of 
those  three  months, —  the  great  object  of  our  extraordinary  call,  and 
where  accuracy  was  most  eminently  desirable.  The  Secretary  calls  it 
$5,251,388,  while  the  President  states  it  at  $4,845,000,  or  a  differ- 
13 


146  STATE    OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY. 

ence  of  $406,388;  and  there  is  also  another  difference  between  his 
items  and  his  sum  total,  of  $45,000.  Now,  I  admit  that  here,  and 
here  for  the  first  and  only  time,  the  President,  as  to  the  means  on 
hand,  speaks  of  the  28th  of  May,  thus  referring  as  to  his  balance  and 
the  amount  of  treasury  notes  on  hand,  when  the  Secretary  refers  to 
the  1st  of  June.  But  if  we  examine  the  items,  and  an  allowance  be 
made  for  that  difference,  it  only  plunges  them  into  another  error  of 
$92,207,  totally  inexplicable.  It  leads,  likewise,  to  the  detection  of 
still  a  third  mistake,  under  this  head,  in  the  estimates  of  receipts  for 
those  three  months.  Both  refer,  then,  to  the  same  period  and  dates 
exactly;  and  yet  the  Secretary's  receipts  are  $50,000  less  than  those 
stated  by  the  President. 

But  I  will  pursue  this  scrutiny  no  further,  though  there  be  still 
other  differences  of  some  thousands  of  dollars,  between  their  statement 
of  the  amount  of  treasury  notes  to  be  redeemed  after  the  4th  of 
March  and  between  the  body  of  the  report  and  the  table  annexed. 
Enough  has  been  disclosed  to  show,  what  is  my  chief  object  in  the 
exposure  at  all,  how  great  haste  and  inattention  have,  from  some 
cause  or  other,  attended  the  preparation  of  this  report,  or  the  most 
material  points  in  it,  and  attended  the  communication  of  the  Secretary's 
results  to  the  President  as  the  data  for  the  financial  statements  of  the 
latter.  This  cutting  down,  and  cutting  up,  and  cutting  aside,  so  much 
from  the  facts  in  figures,  is  cutting  rather  a  poor  figure.  Certain  it 
is,  that  all  these  contradictory  results  cannot  be  correct.  The  Senate 
will  hardly  be  surprised,  after  this  list  of  errors,  and  discrepancies, 
and  contradictions, —  many  of  them  alone  equalling  in  amount  the 
whole  State  taxes  of  several  States  for  several  years, —  to  find  that 
the  Secretary  appears  also  to  have  omitted  separately,  if  not  entirely, 
in  his  exhibit  for  the  three  months,  the  further  expenses  which  the 
President  includes  separately  for  the  census,  amounting  to  $294,000, 
and  for  the  year,  both  that  and  the  expenses  of  this  session ;  making 
an  aggregate  of  $644,000.  On  the  other  hand,  also,  the  President 
seems  to  have  omitted  separately,  both  in  his  statement  for  the  three 
months  as  well  as  the  year,  the  expenses  for  this  session,  which  the 
Secretary  includes  separately  for  the  three  months,  but  omits  wholly 
for  the  year.  This  amounts  to  another  error  of  $350,000  in  the 
message. 

Of  course,  no  improper  design  in  this  is  imputed,  though  the  topic 
of  an  extra  session  was  doubtless  a  sore  and  an  unpleasant  one  to  the 
President,  more  especially  as  it  is  likely,  in  reality,  to  cost  over  half  a 
million,  and  was  not  the  offspring  of  his  deliberations. 

But  the  matter  is  alluded  to  merely  as  another  illustration  of  the 
precipitancy  and  want  of  care  evinced  in  reaching  their  important 
financial  results,  connected  with  the  great  objects  of  action  at  this 
session. 

Is  it  probable,  after  this,  that  those  results  themselves  are  accurate, 
or  anything  approaching  infallibility  ? 


STATE    OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  147 

Is  it  not  likely  that  the  same  or  similar  errors  may  have  crept  into 
these  great  results  themselves,  and  the  computations  leading  to  them? 
But  let  us  try  and  see  the  truth  in  the  data  —  imperfect  and  ques- 
tionable as  they  are  —  which  have  been  placed  before  us. 

In  the  first  place,  we  will  take  the  Secretary's  "  estimated  deficit," 
as  he  calls  it,  for  the  whole  year. 

Now,  one  of  the  most  important  items  in  this,  to  swell  it  doubtfully, 
is  the  last  one,  being  four  millions  of  dollars  for  a  surplus  in  the  treas- 
ury. Can  it  be  possible  that  the  Secretary  supposed  we  should  blindly 
consider  this  a  deficit,  when  the  item  is  not  a  debt  due  to  anybody,  nor 
even  an  appropriation  existing,  but  merely  a  sum  which  it  would,  in 
his  opinion,  be  convenient  to  have  on  deposit  in  his  new  fiscal  bank,  to 
be  used  by  it,  without  interest,  at  our  expense  ?  I  shall  not  here  enter 
into  the  wisdom  of  his  recommendation,  as  it  is  enough  to  say,  on  this 
occasion,  that  the  four  millions  is  neither  a  debt  nor  a  deficit  that 
required  this  session  to  be  held,  and  probably  never  will  be  one.  We 
fall  back,  then,  on  the  Secretary's  previous  "debt  and  deficit,  to  be 
provided  for  in  this  and  the  ensuing  year,  of  $12,088,215."  In 
the  outset,  as  to  this,  it  is  admitted  by  him  that  $6,087,274  of  the 
aggregate  does  not  fall  due  till  the  ensuing  year ;  and,  consequently, 
no  occasion  existed  for  an  extraordinary  session  now  to  fund  it,  or  pro- 
vide for  its  discharge.  But,  beside  this,  it  is  manifest  that,  if  the  tem- 
porary debt  of  about  six  millions,  not  due  till  next  year,  is  all  created 
this  year,  by  issuing  so  many  new  treasury  notes,  it  will  be  to  pay 
off,  among  other  charges  before  included  in  his  aggregate  for  the  next 
ten  months  after  the  4th  of  March,  nearly  five  millions  of  old  treasury 
notes.  Then,  if  you  add  the  amount  of  the  new  notes  to  the  debt  or 
charges,  you  should  subtract  the  old  ones,  which  are  nearly  as  great. 
We  cannot  owe  for  both  at  one  and  the  same  time.  The  balance 
remaining,  then,  being  $6,000,941,  is  the  only  deficit  which  probably 
will  exist  at  all,  and  certainly  all  which  he  considers  as  likely  to  press 
on  the  present  year.  The  first  fact  noticeable  in  that  is  the  incorpo- 
ration into  it  of  new  appropriations  asked  for  the  war  department, 
equalling  $2,521,336.  These  may  never  be  appropriated  by  Congress, 
and  of  course  were  no  deficit  in  March  last,  nor  are  they  now,  nor 
need  they  have  been  the  present  year ;  and  hence,  in  the  present 
inquiry,  should  be  deducted.  This  would  leave  less  than  three  mil- 
lions and  a  half. 

Now,  without  dwelling  on  small  matters,  in  swelling  or  inflating  the 
estimated  expenses  of  the  year,  under  existing  appropriations  for  the 
public  service,  independent  of  the  redemption  of  treasury  notes,  I 
state,  with  confidence,  that  the  Secretary  has  assumed  an  expenditure 
of  the  year  higher  than  is  usual  in  the  new  and  permanent  appropria- 
tions chargeable  to  this  year,  by  quite  four  millions  and  a  half.  This 
is  a  million  more  than  all  which  is  left  of  his  computed  deficit  for  the 
year. 

Thus  the  expenditures  in  any  year  will,  as  before  remarked,  gen- 


148  STATE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY. 

erally  fall  short,  rather  than  exceed,  the  aggregate  of  new  and  perma- 
nent appropriations  for  that  year.  I  have  traced  them  back  for  six 
or  seven  years,  and  the  results  are  of  that  character,  in  the  table  before 
me,  with  only  one  exception.  Again :  in  these  volumes  before  me  are 
the  estimated  expenditures  of  1824,  selected  at  random,  and  the 
estimated  appropriations  to  be  made,  with  the  addition  of  the  perma- 
nent ones,  and  the  difference  between  them  is  only  a  few  thousand  dol- 
lars; and  so  near  do  they  usually  approach,  that  the  estimate  of 
expenditures,  excluding  the  debt,  was  for  a  time  identical,  unless  in 
some  extraordinary  event,  that  was  explained,  with  what  was  computed 
to  be  the  amount  of  the  new  and  permanent  appropriations.  But  has 
the  Secretary,  in  estimating  so  as  to  find  a  deficit  at  the  end  of  the 
year,  respected,  in  the  slightest  degree,  this  guide  of  experience  for 
half  a  century?  No,  sir ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  he  has  computed  his 
expenditures  under  the  existing  appropriations,  exclusive  of  the  debt, 
at  quite  four  and  a  half  millions  more  than  the  amount  of  the  new  and 
permanent  appropriations,  that  have  become  chargeable  in  1841. 
There  is  no  escape  from  this  conclusion,  and  the  force  of  it.  Allow- 
ance may  be  made  for  some  contingencies,  and  for  some  postponed 
appropriations  from  1840  to  1841,  under  which  one-fourth  of  a  million 
more  might  otherwise  have  been  expended  in  1840.  But  they  would 
not  all  materially  swell  the  expenses  much,  if  any,  beyond  twenty  mil- 
lions ;  and  if  they  are  pushed  beyond  that,  as  they  may  be,  by  has- 
tening public  works  prematurely,  or  crowding  sail  in  every  section,  at 
the  request  of  this  friend  and  that,  in  or  out  of  Congress,  and  for  all 
kinds  of  purposes, —  getting  out  yearly  as  much  public  money  as  pos- 
sible, by  advances  into  the  hands  of  contractors  and  disbursing  agents, 
who  place  the  money  in  favorite  banks  near, —  then,  I  say,  the  deficit 
will  be  caused  unnecessarily.  It  will  be  forced,  whatever  may  be  the 
impulse  or  motives,  and  will  and  should  furnish  no  justification  for 
complaint  of  the  past  administration  on  account  of  it,  or  a  resort  to 
this  extraordinary  session  to  provide  for  it. 

It  will,  also,  under  this  reform  administration,  increase  the  expend- 
itures, under  existing  appropriations,  three  millions  beyond  the  maxi- 
mum intended  by  the  last  one ;  and,  if  we  give  the  other  new  ones 
asked,  will  increase  them  six  millions  more,  and,  adding  the  debt  the 
Secretary  proposes  to  create  for  his  surplus  and  new  bank,  will  swell 
them  to  twenty-four  millions  higher  than  even  that  six. 

But  if  twenty  or  twenty-one  millions  should  be  expended  under  any 
peculiar  though  unexplained  circumstances  in  the  year,  which  is  one 
and  a  half  to  two  and  a  half  millions  more  than  is  justified  by  the 
experience  of  fifty  years,  the  estimate  is  some  millions  too  high,  and 
there  would  still  be  no  deficit,  because  the  Secretary  has  included 
among  his  expenditures,  to  reduce  treasury  notes,  an  item  of  $1,110,- 
611,  with  interest,  equalling  about  $66,000,  which  notes  are  not  due 
till  next  year ;  and  so  far  from  its  being  probable,  as  the  Secretary 
supposes,  that  they  may  be  paid  in  for  duties  prematurely,  and  before 


STATE    OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  149 

due,  the  reverse  is  true,  looking  to  the  condition  of  the  money  market, 
so  ver y  easy,  and  the  demand  for  these  notes  as  an  investment,  so  very 
great.  They  are  worth  here  a  quarter  to  three-fourths  per  cent, 
more  than  specie.  But  we  have,  in  his  own  experience,  a  fact  that 
these  are  not  likely  to  be  paid  in,  under  such  circumstances,  because 
his  own  monthly  return  for  the  first  of  June  exhibits  but  $80,000 
paid  in,  of  near  four  millions  which  had  been  issuing  during  the  last 
three  months.  Thus,  his  own  records  prove  that,  in  the  ratio  of  this 
amount,  not  two  hundred  thousand  dollars  of  the  whole  would  proba- 
bly straggle  into  the  custom-houses  and  land  offices  till  the  next  year, 
when  they  became  due.  Near  a  quarter  of  a  million  more  in  his 
aggregate,  looking  at  the  monthly  return  at  the  beginning  of  this 
year,  is  out  and  lost,  or  hoarded,  or  in  circulation  as  currency,  which, 
with  the  interest  he  has  computed  on  them,  will  probably  not  consti- 
tute a  charge  the  present  year.  Several  thousand  dollars  of  the  issues 
even  in  the  last  war  of  1812  are  still  out ;  so  that,  after  making  these 
deductions,  and  adding  to  his  means  the  balance  in  the  mint,  which 
can  be  resorted  to  when  necessary,  and  the  additional  sum  due  from 
banks  for  interest,  &c,  being  about  $150,000  more,  and,  gentlemen 
will  see,  that  instead  of  a  deficit,  a  very  considerable  balance  would  be 
in  the  treasury,  without  adding  near  a  million  from  duties  and  lands, 
which  the  Secretary  has  probably  under-estimated.  To  that,  how- 
ever, we  will  advert  more,  soon.  But  the  Secretary  would,  under 
this  economical  administration,  defeat  all  this,  and  spend  twenty-six 
millions  in  1841,  when  the  past  extravagant  administration  proposed 
to  expend  only  twenty  millions,  at  the  utmost.  The  past  administra- 
tion was,  in  and  out  of  Congress,  and  by  candidates  for  very  high 
offices,  assailed  as  wastefully  expending  forty  to  fifty  millions  a  year, 
when,  in  reality,  it  never  expended,  in  the  usual  and  true  meaning  of 
the  term,  excluding  trusts,  more  than  between  thirty- two  and  thirty- 
three  millions ;  and  reduced  the  expenses,  from  that  amount,  as  low  as 
twenty-three  millions.  Yet,  those  who  belied  them,  in  this  respect, 
over  the  whole  country,  instead  of  reducing  them  to  the  eighteen 
or  twenty  we  proposed,  or  the  thirteen  they  promised,  are  now  trying 
to  run  them  up  to  more  than  twice  this  last  amount,  by  pushing  rap- 
idly all  expenditures,  and  making  enormous  new  appropriations,  and 
by  asking  leave  to  incur  a  debt  beside,  on  their  own  account  and  for 
their  own  schemes,  exceeding  twenty-four  millions  more. 

Indeed,  the  senator  from  Kentucky,  in  a  memorial  that  he  presented 
from  Georgia,  a  few  days  ago,  endorsed  and  approved  its  views,  where 
the  expenditures  heretofore  yearly  were  again  exaggerated  to  forty  or 
fifty  millions ;  when,  in  truth,  they  never  nominally  reached  even 
forty,  nor  really,  excluding  trusts,  ever  reached  thirty-three  millions ; 
and  when,  as  just  observed,  they  had  become  reduced,  in  1840,  to  only 
twenty-three  millions,  and  in  1841  were  intended  to  be  not  above 
twenty  millions. 

The  Georgia  memorial,  become  important  only  by  that  senator's 
13* 


150  STATE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY. 

approval  of  its  contents,  asked  to  have  them  reduced  to  thirteen  or 
fifteen  millions. 

Now,  are  this  report  and  its  recommendations  the  first  illustration 
of  the  sincerity  in  our  opponents,  as  to  such  a  reduction  ]  Is  it  to  he 
effected,  as  the  report  recommends,  by  augmenting  our  expenses  to 
ten  or  twelve  millions  beyond  even  the  fifteen  which  is  to  be  their 
maximum  1  Is  this  their  mode  of  fulfilling  such  promises  to  the 
people  1     But  enough  of  this,  at  present. 

I  pass  on  then,  sir,  to  the  only  other  and  most  material  deficit,  esti- 
mated, for  the  next  three  months,  by  the  President,  at  $4,845,000, 
and  by  the  Secretary,  at  $5,251,888.  This  is  the  great  point  upon 
which  the  session,  in  a  financial  view,  is  to  be  vindicated  or  fail.  If 
either  of  those  amounts  was  likely  to  be  needed  as  early  as  September, 
in  the  usual  administration  of  the  treasury,  in  frugal  and  vigilant 
attention  to  prevent  such  a  calamity,  rather  than  to  hasten  it,  then  I 
admit  that  the  public  faith  ought  to  be  protected,  and  proper  measures 
be  seasonably  adopted  for  that  purpose.  But  this  should  not  be 
allowed  unnecessarily,  and  especially  after  Congress  had  just  been  in 
session,  and  provided  all  it  deemed  proper  to  be  expended,  and  no  new 
facts  or  disclosures,  material  to  this  question,  had  been  made  since 
their  adjournment.  Much  can  be  accomplished,  to  prevent  unneces- 
sary advances  and  premature  expenditures,  by  attention  to  this  sub- 
ject in  the  head  of  the  department,  whose  imperious  duty  it  is  to  guard 
well  the  public  treasure  against  being  called  out  before  needed,  or  in  a 
manner  apparently  inconsiderate,  precipitant  and  dangerous ;  and  when 
he  entertains  doubts  on  these  points,  to  state  them,  if  required,  to  pre- 
vent waste,  —  to  have  the  moral  courage  to  remonstrate  in  the  proper 
quarter. 

In  reaching  the  result  that  a  large  deficit  must  happen  by  Septem- 
ber, it  is,  by  this  time,  I  think,  deemed  possible,  if  not  probable,  that 
the  Secretary  may  have  fallen  into  some  mistakes,  from  Ins  wishes 
and  anxiety  to  find  some  apology  for  our  early  meeting.  He  natu- 
rally would  feel  inclined,  when  any  plausible  data  existed,  to  increase 
the  expected  amount  of  expenses,  and  lessen  the  expected  amount  of 
receipts.     This,  we  have  already  seen,  would  be  characteristic. 

In  examining  the  grounds  of  his  supposed  deficit  for  the  next  three 
months,  as  bearing  on  the  necessity  for  our  early  call  here,  and  for 
funding  and  making  a  national  debt  in  consequence,  and  of  a  high 
tariff,  — some  of  the  most  important  measures  submitted  for  our  action, 
— it  is  proper  to  be  accurate  as  possible.  The  result,  if  showing  a  real 
deficit  of  five  to  six  millions,  is  the  great  pivot  of  the  present  session. 
If  showing  none,  we  certainly  ought  not  to  have  been  now  called  from 
our  homes,  and  might  usefully  adjourn  to-morrow.  What,  then,  was 
likely  to  be  the  deficit,  when  we  were  summoned,  or  when  we  met  ? 
Many  would  infer,  from  the  report  and  the  message,  that  it  was  near 
five  millions  of  dollars.  The  President  says,  —  "  Leaving  a  probable 
deficit,  on  the  1st  of  September  next,  of  about  $4,845,000. ;J     The 


STATE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  151 

Secretary  says,  —  "  Leaving  a  deficit  of  $5,251,388.30."  In  this 
difference  or  disagreement,  of  more  than  four  hundred  thousand  dollars, 
it  will  be  courteous  and  liberal  to  consider  it  between  them ;  first,  at 
the  President's  estimate,  and  then  at  the  Secretary's. 

But  it  will  be  observed,  in  the  outset,  that  this  is  not  the  deficit 
which  has  occurred,  or  is  likely  to  occur,  under  existing  appropria- 
tions ;  but  it  is  one  which  those  officers  expect  to  have,  if  you  will 
authorize  further  new  expenditures,  and  also,  according  to  the  Secre- 
tary, insert  among  them,  to  make  a  deficit  to  justify  an  extra  session, 
the  expenses  expected  to  be  incurred  by  holding  that  very  session. 

Let  us,  then,  deduct,  first,  from  the  $4,845,000,  all  the  new  appro- 
priations not  yet  made,  but  which  the  Secretary  asks  you  to  make. 
The  census  is  estimated  at  $294,000,  the  extra  session  at  $350,000, 
and  the  wants  of  the  war  department  at  $2,521,336.  These  make 
$3,165,336,  and  would  leave  $1,679,664. 

If  it  be  said  that  it  is  not  clear,  from  the  message,  nor  even  the  lucid 
report,  that  the  new  war  department  expenses  are  included,  then  I  say 
that  the  expenses  estimated  for  the  war  department,  under  old  appro- 
priations alone,  are  quite  this  amount  too  high.  They  are,  in  the 
Secretary's  report,  estimated  at  $4,591,098,  which  would  be  at  the 
rate  of  $18,364,392  per  year,  for  that  department  alone;  when  they 
should  not  be  over  ten  or  eleven  millions.  So  the  President's  expend- 
iture of  $8,100,000  for  "the  current  service"  in  those  three  months 
would  be  equally  too  high,  as  it  would  be  at  the  rate,  for  the  current 
service  alone,  of  more  than  $32,000,000  for  the  year. 

It  is  immaterial,  therefore,  as  to  the  result,  which  hypothesis  is  the 
true  one,  under  the  want  of  certainty  that  exists. 

Deducting  this  amount  of  appropriations  not  yet  made,  or  a  mani- 
fest over-estimate  of  expenditure  under  the  existing  appropriations  for 
the  current  service,  and  the  whole  deficit  on  the  face  of  the  report 
dwindles  down,  as  before  stated,  to  only  $1,679,664.  But  the  Secre- 
tary admits  that  the  treasury  notes  to  be  redeemed  are  not  so  high  as 
the  President  states  them  to  be  by  $93,100 ;  deduct  that,  and  there 
is  left  only  $1,586,564. 

I  shall  next  proceed  to  show  that,  by  inadvertence,  the  Secretary 
has  himself  probably  computed  the  old  treasury  notes  that  will  be 
redeemed  in  the  next  three  months  too  high  by  quite  a  million  of 
dollars. 

Thus,  by  the  monthly  report,  published  on  the  1st  instant,  the 
aggregate  of  treasury  notes  out  and  issued  under  the  old  acts,  and  not 
the  present  one,  was  $3,981,000.  Of  these  we  have  before  shown 
that  there  were  issued,  between  the  1st  of  January  and  the  4th  of 
March,  and  of  course  not  falling  due  in  the  next  three  months,  near 
$1,110,000.  It  appears,  also,  from  another  part  of  the  Secretary's 
report,  that  of  these  were  issued,  between  the  4th  of  March  and  the 
30th,  under  the  old  law,  about  $413,000.  We  have  before  estimated, 
and  stated  facts  in  the  actual  returns  as  evidence  of  it,  that  at  least 


152  STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY. 

one-fourth  of  a  million  of  these  are  old  notes,  lost  and  in  circulation, 
which  will  probably  not  be  presented  for  payment  at  all  in  1841. 
This,  without  interest,  would  be  near  $240,000.  It  further  appears, 
from  the  monthly  statements  in  last  September,  October,  November, 
December,  and  January,  that  in  the  last  four  months  of  the  last  year 
there  were  issued,  which  will  not  fall  due  till  after  the  1st  of  Septem- 
ber, 1841,  treasury  notes  equal  to  $670,000.  Now,  supposing  these 
all  to  remain  out  till  due,  as  is  probable,  and  the  whole,  with  those 
not  likely  to  be  presented,  constitutes  an  aggregate  of  $2,433,000, 
which  will  not,  on  their  face,  be  payable  and  presented  in  the  next 
three  months.  Deduct  this  from  all  the  old  notes  out  on  the  1st  of 
June,  and  it  would  leave  but  $1,548,000,  and  interest  on  the  sum, 
about  $90,000,  to  be  redeemed  in  the  next  three  months,  instead  of 
$2,850,000,  including  interest. 

The  error  of  the  Secretary  has  probably  arisen  from  supposing  that 
most  of  those  issued  in  the  corresponding  months  in  1840  were  still 
out,  when  it  is  likely  that,  in  the  pressure  for  money  last  fall  and 
winter,  when  the  United  States  Bank  was  pursuing  its  extraordinary 
course  towards  New  York,  many  of  the  treasury  notes  before  issued 
were  paid  in  for  duties.  Add  interest  on  the  above  amount,  and 
allowing  beside  near  $200,000  for  any  contingencies  as  to  other  notes 
being  paid  in  prematurely,  &c.  &c,  and  the  million  excess  is  prob- 
able, and,  if  deducted  from  the  residue  of  the  deficit,  leaves  of  the 
whole  but  $586,574.  But  when  we  advert  next  to  the  estimated 
receipts  for  the  next  three  months,  it  immediately  appears  that  those 
from  customs  are  estimated  below  the  Secretary's  own  average,  for 
the  last  ten  months  of  1841,  quite  $600,000,  and  the  lands  quite 
$50,000. 

Correcting  this  error  on  his  own  data, — and  we  know  that  July  is  to 
be  one  of  the  largest  months  in  this  year  for  receipts  from  duties,  in 
consequence  of  the  very  large  imports,  in  January,  on  three  and  six 
months'  credit,  and  that  very  large  quantities  of  land  are  advertised  to 
be  sold  in  June, — and  the  whole  estimated  deficit  has  disappeared,  and 
a  balance  would  be  left  in  the  treasury  of  $63,426. 

If,  from  the  circumstances  just  mentioned,  the  receipts  be  increased 
near  half  a  million  higher,  which  is  probable,  for  the  three  months, 
from  lands  and  duties,  and  there  be  collected,  as  might  be,  $150,000 
more  from  banks  than  is  estimated  in  these  three  months,  and  the  bal- 
ance in  the  treasury  on  the  1st  of  September  would  be  near  three- 
fourths  of  a  million. 

From  another  part  of  the  report  it  appears  that  there  would  be  in 
the  mint,  besides,  which  could  be  used  if  found  necessary,  $180,199 ; 
and  we  know  that  the  actual  receipts  at  this  date,  on  the  first  of  June, 
not  then  returned  to  the  department,  which  are  afterwards  returned, 
and  can  be  used,  will  be  usually  $100,000  to  $150,000  more,  or 
enough  to  make  $300,000.  These  last  items  amount  to  nearly  as 
much  as  the  deficit  of  the  Secretary  exceeds  that  of  the  President.    So 


STATE   OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY.  153 

that,  taking  either  as  the  correct  ground  of  calculation,  there  would, 
under  these  expenditures,  be  no  deficit  whatever,  but,  in  the  Presi- 
dent's aggregate,  a  balance  on  hand  of  more  than  a  million  of  dollars, 
and  in  the  Secretary's,  of  near  three-fourths  of  a  million. 

To  be  sure,  as  before  intimated,  this  balance  can  be  prevented  from 
accruing,  if  the  executive  departments,  and  those  under  them,  push 
expenditures  faster  than  is  usual  or  legitimate, — and  they  probably  have 
been  pushed  so,  during  the  last  three  months, —  or  if  we  authorize,  at 
this  session,  the  new  expenditures  desired,  by  means  of  new  appropri- 
ations. But  such  a  result  as  a  deficit  of  five  or  six  millions  is  other- 
wise not  likely,  and  hardly  possible,  by  the  first  of  September,  unless 
the  receipts  are  kept  down  below  what  is  natural,  by  not  advertising 
lands  for  sale,  or  by  further  measures  checking  still  more  our  foreign 
commerce,  and  destroying  what  is  left,  since  the  United  States  Bank 
explosion,  of  our  foreign  credit.  Indeed,  the  receipts  for  the  next  three 
months,  as  well  as  for  the  year,  have  been  estimated  by  me  but  a  little 
higher  than  by  the  Secretary  himself.  That  little,  I  think,  he  ought, 
in  only  ordinary  liberality,  to  concede,  under  all  the  circumstances. 

Thus  he  omits  near  $200,000  interest  due  from  banks,  and  about 
$80,000  due  from  the  United  States  Bank.  This  last,  it  seems,  by 
an  answer  to  our  new  call,  is  now  to  be  nullified  by  some  new  account, 
trumped  up  since  the  4th  of  March,  and  the  restoration,  I  suppose, 
of  new  principles,  which  the  Secretary,  in  another  place,  dwells  on 
with  such  complacency.  He  may  collect  neither  of  these,  if  he  pleases 
not  to  do  his  duty ;  but  they  are  all  due,  and  should  be  estimated  and 
collected,  unless  Congress  otherwise  directs. 

He  also  estimates  the  receipts  from  customs,  during  the  whole  year, 
nearly  five  millions  less  than  the  most  intelligent  merchants,  collectors, 
and  subordinate  officers  in  the  treasury,  did  last  December,  provided 
the  banks  resumed,  and  business  took  half  the  magical  impulse  which 
many  of  the  politicians  of  the  country  predicted. 

But  I  concede  that  they  did  not  resume,  except  to  a  limited  extent  ; 
and  that  most  of  those  resuming  soon  after  suspended  again,  and  have 
been  so  dependent  on  the  United  States  Bank  of  Pennsylvania,  and  so 
injured  by  her  malconduct,  as,  with  that,  to  blast,  in  some  measure, 
the  reviving  prospects  of  trade,  growing  out  of  the  laws  of  trade,  and 
not  political  elections,  and  to  destroy  much  of  our  credit  abroad,  which 
existed  last  December.  Some  allowances  were  suggested,  in  the  annual 
report  in  December  last,  as  proper  to  be  made,  in  case  of  the  banks  not 
resuming,  though  sanguine  politicians  professed  to  believe  that  the 
election  alone  of  a  new  President  would,  at  all  events,  act  like  elec- 
tricity on  commerce,  and  swell  our  business  and  revenue  to  the  highest 
pitch. 

One  of  them,  and  no  careless  or  circumscribed  observer,  said : 

"  The  fact  of  his  election  (  William  Henry  Harrison)  alone,  without  reference  to 
the  measures  of  his  administration,  will  powerfully  contribute  to  the  security  and 
happiness  of  the  people.     It  will  bring  assurance  of  the  cessation  of  that  long  series 


154  STATE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY. 

of  disastrous  experiments  which  have  so  greatly  afflicted  the  people.  CONFIDENCE 
will  IMMEDIATELY  REVIVE,  credit  will  be  restored,  active  business  will  return, 
PRICES  of  products  will  RISE  ;  and  the  people  will  feel  and  know  that,  instead 
of  their  servants  being  occupied  in  devising  measures  for  their  ruin  and  destruction, 
they  will  be  assiduously  employed  in  promoting  their  welfare  uad  prosperity."  — 
Speech  of  Henry  Clay,  at  Hanover,  July  10,  1840. 

Similar  political  prophecies  were  numerous.  But  the  election  came, 
virtually,  in  November  and  December,  but  without  any  of  the  revival 
in  prices  the  public  had  previously  been  led  to  expect,  and  none  of  the 
new  impulses  to  commerce,  from  political  events,  which  had  been  so 
confidently  predicted. 

The  increase  of  importations  would  have  occurred  in  January,  from 
the  great  laws  of  trade,  whoever  had  been  elected  President ;  and  it 
would  have  been  checked  again  in  February,  as  it  was,  whoever  was 
or  was  to  be  President,  by  the  same  great  laws,  violated,  as  they 
were,  through  the  conduct  of  the  United  States  Bank,  spreading  ruin, 
for  a  time,  among  many  in  great  classes  in  both  hemispheres.  Disap- 
pointed by  the  election  in  its  promised  fruits,  and  likely  to  be  dese- 
crated as  false  prophets,  it  was  next  pretended  that  it  was  necessary 
to  have  actual  possession  of  office  in  all  its  ramifications  before  a  mil- 
lennium in  these  matters  was  to  be  complete.  Then  even  the  sanguine 
hopes,  as  to  imports,  cherished  in  December,  would  be  exceeded.  That, 
too,  has  come ;  offices  innumerable  have  been  seized  on  as  the  spoils  of 
victory,  and  yet  prices  and  business  are  somewhat  obstinate  about 
changing  for  the  better ;  and  now  it  is  new  measures,  new  legislation, 
which  is  to  swell  the  tide  of  glory,  and  work  the  great  reform  and 
revival.  Where  political  quackery  is  to  end,  on  these  topics,  remains 
to  be  seen ;  but  as  the  measures  of  relief  can  now  be  adopted  to  any 
extent  desired, —  as  not  only  the  election  has  been  consummated  near 
half  a  year ;  the  conquered  trophies  of  office  enjoyed  for  near  a  quarter 
of  a  year ;  all  the  alleged  leaks  in  the  treasury,  it  is  to  be  presumed, 
stopped ;  all  defaults  prevented ;  and  those  magical  Sibylline  new  books 
opened,  which  were  to  effect  such  miracles  in  finance, —  I  think  the 
Secretary  might  be  a  little  more  generous  in  respect  to  his  estimate  of 
receipts  for  the  next  three  months,  as  well  as  the  rest  of  the  year. 
The  President  is  kind  enough  to  anticipate  a  revival  of  prosperity, 
though  omitting  to  increase  the  revenue  any  on  account  of  it ;  and  the 
Secretary  should  assuredly  allow  from  half  a  million  to  a  million  more 
in  this  year  for  receipts,  if  he  believes  a  tithe  of  the  predictions  of 
those  around  him,  as  to  the  sudden  and  wondrous  increase  of  prices 
and  business  which  their  mere  advent  to  power,  and,  beside  this,  their 
wise  measures,  were  to  produce.  If  this  increase  do  not  forthwith 
come,  it  certainly  will  not  be  for  the  want  of  political  poAver  to  remove 
any  political  objections,  and  for  want  of  political  nostrums  in  abun- 
dance to  cure  all  kinds  of  evils.  But  it  will  rather  be  because  the 
United  States  Bank,  like  the  dying  whale  or  leviathan,  has.  in  its  death- 
flurry,  wounded  or  destroyed  most  of  the  credit  and  business  of  a  large 


STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY.  155 

part  of  the  country.  It  must  be  that  the  gambling  speculations,  and 
gross  over- trading  and  over-banking,  which  have  led  to  her  ruin,  have 
been  too  deeply  seated,  too  corrupting,  and  too  much  intermingled  in 
the  whole  pursuits  of  our  people,  either  to  have  been  caused  by  the 
politics  of  one  President  being  democratic,  or  to  be  cured  by  those  of 
another  being  federal. 

By  the  time  of  the  next  meeting  of  this  body,  we  shall  be  able  to 
see  whether  the  present  additional  patent  medicines,  now  proposed  for 
relief  of  all  kinds,  are  successful,  or  are  to  be  followed  by  some  new 
political  panacea,  and  the  political  millennium  to  come  which  is  again 
and  again  postponed,  notwithstanding  all  the  confident  whig  prophecies 
to  the  contrary. 

I  have  done  with  the  expenditures  and  receipts,  with  deficits  and 
debts,  and  next  will  advert  to  the  measures  of  relief  proposed  to  get 
rid  of  any  deposits  or  debts,  which  the  Secretary  calculates  to  exist  in 
such  inflated,  exaggerated  amounts. 

The  General  Government,  the  States,  and  the  people,  are  all  rep- 
resented, by  him  and  by  the  President,  to  be  in  a  most  suffering  condi- 
tion ;  and,  not  contented  to  administer  advice  to  the  patient  placed  in 
their  charge  by  the  constitution,  viz.,  the  General  Government,  they 
embrace  in  their  benevolent  plans  all  the  disorders  of  the  State  Gov- 
ernments, and  all  the  ills  which  flesh  is  heir  to  among  the  people  at 
large.  Some  brief  views  on  their  extended  system  of  legislating  for 
almost  everybody  and  everything, — on  the  character  and  propriety  of 
these  extraordinary  measures  of  relief, —  and  I  shall  relieve  the  Senate 
from  any  further  attention  to  me  on  this  occasion. 

The  first  prominent  feature  in  the  relief  proposed  is  to  magnify  its 
extent  and  importance  in  all  possible  ways ;  like  many  physicians,  who 
never  attempt  to  cure  the  smallest  scratch  or  slightest  fever,  without 
seeking  to  persuade  the  patient  and  his  friends  that  lock-jaws,  chole- 
ras, and  all  other  horrors,  have  been  escaped,  by  resorting  to  their 
skill  and  aid. 

The  next  is,  when  the  General  Government  is  represented  to  be 
embarrassed,  and  overloaded  with  monstrous  debts  and  deficits,  to 
begin  and  take  from  it  three  millions  of  its  present  resources.  Not  to 
take  from  it  a  surplus, — relieve  it  of  an  incumbrance;  but,  while 
debilitated,  as  they  say,  struggling  with  exhaustion,  to  bleed  it  three 
millions  more. 

Not  satisfied  with  this,  the  next  wise  proposition  is  to  take  from  it 
even  nine  millions  more,  and  to  give  it  to  those  States  who  are  at  this 
moment  indebted  to  it  over  twenty-eight  millions,  and  who,  so  far 
from  having  any  claim  to  this  nine  millions  as  a  debt  due,  are  bound, 
in  law  and  common  honesty,  and  by  their  plighted  faith,  to  pay  us 
back,  in  this  exigency,  the  whole  of  that  twenty-eight  millions.  This 
giving  away  of  twelve  millions  by  us,  when  represented  to  be  much  in 
debt,  that  should  be  paid, — this  "  new  way  of  paying  old  debts," — is 
one  so  sagacious  and  profound  as  never  to  have  occurred  to  the  author 


156  STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY. 

of  the  play  under  that  title.  It  is  left  to  the  present  administration, 
as  one  of  its  glories,  to  have  made  the  great  discovery. 

The  next  unique  or  peculiar  feature  in  the  measures  proposed  is  to 
grow  rich  by  banking  on  borrowed  capital.  This  is  the  sovereign 
remedy,  and  proposed  and  elaborated  in  supplemental  reports,  with 
much  gravity,  notwithstanding  the  monuments  of  ruin  now  standing 
before  us,  from  similar  quack  experiments,  in  Michigan,  in  Mississippi, 
and,  it  is  to  be  feared,  in  several  other  States  ;  and  which  identical  kind 
of  effort  to  grow  rich  in  a  new  way  has  brought  on  them  most  of  the 
evils  we  are  advised  to  help  remove  by  precisely  the  same  kind  of 
hazardous  and  ruinous  experiment. 

Another  feature  running  through  the  whole  of  these  rare  schemes 
is,  that  we  are  to  raise  the  wind,  not  for  one  alone,  but  for  the  whole 
of  them  at  first,  by  means  of  the  boasted  modern  credit  system.  Not 
by  any  present  surplus,  for  they  pretend  there  is  a  deficiency ;  not  by 
retaining  all  our  present  revenues,  for  many  of  those  they  propose  to 
give  away ;  not  by  reducing  our  expenditures,  for  those  they  recom- 
mend to  increase ;  but  by  overloading  this  already  embarrassed  gov- 
ernment, as  they  call  it,  and  this  already  ruined  people,  as  they  pre- 
tend, and  all  their  posterity  for  ages,  with  an  immense  permanent 
national  debt,  in  a  period  of  profound  peace  with  all  foreign  nations. 

Yes,  one  of  the  most  striking  elements  in  these  recommendations, 
not  yet  enlarged  on,  is,  after  denouncing  the  past  administration  as 
wasteful,  with  expenses  only  twenty-three  millions  last  year,  and  pro- 
posed to  be  not  over  twenty  this  year,  and  yet  profess  to  practise 
retrenchment  and  reform,  by  increasing  these  expenses  to  twenty-six 
millions,  and  to  relieve  the  public  suffering  by  adding  to  the  debt  mil- 
lions on  millions,  for  the  most  dangerous  and  reckless  experiment  in 
public  banking  that  has  occurred  since  the  Mississippi  scheme  of  John 
Law,  more  than  a  century  ago.  If  our  new  plans  in  this  report  reach 
Europe,  and  are  there  understandable,  I  think  we  shall  obtain  the 
high  reputation  of  being  very  Solomons  in  wisdom  as  to  monied  mat- 
ters, and  shall  succeed,  as  we  ought  on  such  bases,  in  obtaining  their 
liberal  loans. 

The  whole,  sir,  is  wrong  in  fundamental  principles.  I  would  call 
it,  except  for  the  high  source  whence  it  emanated,  a  system  of  most 
wretched  quackery  in  both  politics  and  finance.  It  savors  of  the 
Biddle  school  throughout. 

We  should  begin,  as  well  as  end,  in  economy.  We  should  resort  to 
old-fashioned  frugality  in  expenses,  old-fashioned  thrift  by  industry. 
We  should  begin,  as  well  as  advance,  by  saving  and  labor,  by  holding 
on  to  our  present  resources,  keeping  what  we  have  already  got,  and 
instead  of  giving  them  away  like  the  spendthrift,  obtaining  more,  so 
far  as  our  real  wants  require,  and  as  can  be  raised  without  proving 
too  burthensome  to  the  people. 

As  the  Georgia  memorial  justly  prays,  we  should  reduce  rather 
than  increase  expenses ;  and  the  financial  committees  could  not  too 


STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY.  157 

soon  call  on  the  President  and  Secretary  for  specific  plans  and  items 
for  reduction,  so  as  to  bring  down  the  aggregate  to  the  thirteen  or 
fifteen  millions  approved  by  that  memorial  and  the  senator  from  Ken- 
tucky. There  is  not  a  single  case  pointed  out,  in  either,  for  retrench- 
ment. Let  them  practise  what  they  preach.  Let  us  not  have  economy 
merely  in  speeches,  but  extravagance  in  votes, — reform  in  generals. 
but  waste  in  all  particulars.  Let  us  not  begin,  as  at  this  session, 
with  a  proposal  to  increase  judicial  salaries, — as  at  the  last  session  of 
the  Senate  after  the  fourth  of  March,  with  putting  officers  on  salaries 
with  no  duties  for  months  to  perform^  and  with  advocating  additional 
allowances  to  others.  Above  all,  sir,  let  us  not  resort  to  the  misera- 
ble shifts  of  desperate  debtors,  by  kiting  and  new  loans,  to  postpone, 
merely,  the  evil  day,  but  to  increase  greatly,  in  the  end,  the  debt ; 
and  then  most  complacently  concur  with  the  Secretary,  in  this  report, 
that  such  is  one  of  his  "  early  and  effectual  measures  to  prevent  the 
further  augmentation  of  the  debt" 

He  is  also  to  "prevent  this  further  augmentation  of  the  debt"  by 
paying  away,  as  before  remarked,  three  millions  of  our  resources  from 
lands  and  nine  millions  as  a  fourth  instalment,  and  supply  the  amount 
of  them  by  a  new  loan,  or  increased  debt,  to  the  amount  of  twelve  mil- 
lions of  dollars.  He  is  to  do  this,  too,  when  it  is  apparent  as  the  dome 
on  your  capitol  that  they  have  no  claim  on  us  for  a  dollar  due  as  a 
debt,  but  really  owe  us  something  like  twenty-eight  millions.  The 
President  is  a  Virginian,  and  not  quite  so  loose  or  flat,  and,  therefore, 
does  not  pretend  they  have  any  such  claim.  Did  it  never  occur  to 
the  Secretary  that,  if  there  was  any  pretence  to  justify  a  payment  of 
this  nine  millions  to  them  as  a  deposite,  it  would  be  much  easier,  and 
just,  and  prudent,  to  pay  it  according  to  the  views  of  a  plain  Yankee, 
by  deducting  it  from  the  twenty-eight  millions  they  now  owe  us,  and 
holding  them  liable  for  only  the  balance? 

This  would  be  rather  more  of  an  "  early  and  effectual  measure  to 
prevent  the  augmentation  of  the  debt,"  than  to  place  in  a  debtor's 
hands  still  more  money,  without  interest,  and  to  procure  it  by  addi- 
tional borrowing,  on  interest.  It  is  vain  to  expect  more  surpluses  to 
aid  us.  It  was  quite  as  vain  to  expect  them,  when  the  present  Secre- 
tary of  War  lost  a  fortification  bill,  by  insisting  on  placing  a  rider  in 
it  to  make  a  second  distribution  of  millions  on  his  estimates,  while  he 
censured  others  for  erroneous  estimates  tending  to  show  none  were 
likely  to  occur. 

It  is  equally  vain  to  expect  relief  from  a  national  bank  of  any 
kind,  aside  from  its  unconstitutionality  and  dangers  to  public  liberty. 
I  will  merely  say,  as  to  the  constitutional  question,  that  the  State 
rights  man,  or  democrat  of  1798,  who  can  swallow  this  new  Fiscal 
Bank  as  constitutional,  could  swallow  both  Jonah  and  the  whale,  as 
easy  as  the  whale  did  Jonah  alone. 

Was  the  new  fiscal  agent  of  the  President  and  the  national  bank 
of  the  Secretary,  deemed  by  them  free  from  constitutional  objections, 


158  STATE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY. 

one  and  the  same  institution  in  form  and  substance  1  Or  is  one  an 
animal  without  claws,  and  the  other,  as  explained  to  us  in  the  special 
report,  the  old  hyena  or  tigress,  with  power  to  issue,  circulate,  and 
discount  notes,  as  well  as  take  deposites, — with  power  to  act  out  of 
the  District  of  Columbia,  and  for  other  portions  of  the  Union,  if  they 
please,  as  well  as  for  this  District,  and  thus  involving  all  the  old 
objections  to  its  violation  of  the  constitution?  As  well  might  we 
appropriate  millions  for  paupers,  roads  and  jails,  in  the  District  of 
Columbia,  with  authority  to  pay  a  certain  proportion  of  it  to  such  of 
the  States  as  might  agree  to  take  it,  and  call  the  result  constitutional. 
The  consent  or  dissent  of  the  States,  unless  for  altering  the  constitu- 
tion in  the  prescribed  mode,  can  never  make  an  act  or  a  charter  con- 
stitutional, which  would  otherwise  be  unconstitutional.  It  would  be 
irrelevant  and  absurd.  Accordingly,  in  the  last  clause  of  the  prepared 
charter,  in  his  supplemental  report,  he  nullifies  this  provision  about 
the  assent  of  the  States,  by  empowering  Congress  to  push  the  bank 
where  it  pleases,  and  thus  involving  all  the  power  exercised  in  the  old 
charters. 

But,  as  before  remarked,  I  do  not  mean  to  argue  here  the  constitu- 
tionality of  this  measure  of  relief  which  the  Secretary  proposes,  or 
even  its  expediency,  further  than  to  say  this :  that  the  new  Fiscal 
Bank,  with  twenty  millions  of  its  capital  furnished  by  us,  as  is 
involved  in  the  project,  and  that  to  be  controlled  by  a  board  of  politi- 
cians here,  under  the  eyes  and  nose  of  the  executive,  will  be,  in  the 
nature  of  things,  and  by  examples  in  several  States  as  to  their  public 
banks,  loaned  almost  exclusively  to  politicians  and  office-holders,  large 
and  small,  and  thus  the  great  danger  of  executive  influence  be  increased 
four-fold,  and  much  of  the  public  treasure  exposed  to  be  irretrievably 
lost.  And,  finally,  by  locating  the  mother  bank  here,  instead  of  a 
sub-treasury,  for  a  fiscal  agent,  because  the  latter,  in  the  Secretary's 
wisdom,  improperly  concentrated  the  surplus  funds  at  New  York, — if 
he  means  to  cart  the  spare  specie  hither,  or  distribute  it  across  the 
Alleghanies,  he  will  justly  be  obnoxious  to  the  censures  of  his  own 
political  party.  One  of  his  own  presses  says,  "  He  would  thus  wage 
a  continual  ivar  with  well-known  useful  and  salutary  commer- 
cial laws ;"  and  that  he  would  thus  make  his  "official  pockets  as 
empty  as  his  ideas  are  jejune"  A  man,  they  justly  say,  is  not 
born  a  financier  or  a  Secretary ;  and  must  take  much  pains  to  inform 
himself,  before  he  catechises  others,  or  dashes  into  absurdities,  as  if 
he  knew  everything  by  instinct  or  intuition. 

Another  intelligent  whig  banker  writes  to  me,  in  a  letter  from 
which  I  quote : 

"  The  precious  metals  (says  the  writer)  must  be  so  arranged  and  placed  as  to  save 
a  great  amount  of  labor.  The  great  saving  is  in  having  them  so  situated  that  they 
can  pay  balances,  instead  of  sides  of  account. 

*«  At  a  central  point  of  commerce,  large  districts  of  country  can  settle  their  balances 
without  any  movement  of  the  metals.     The  world,  for  great  operations,  can  revolve 


STATE    OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  159 

round  London  ;  the  United  States  round  New  York  ;  New  England  round  Boston. 
All  perfect  as  operations  are  limited  or  expanded.  The  economy  is  in  perfecting  set- 
tlements without  any  movement  of  the  metals.  The  saving  is  in  time,  risk,  and 
transportation.     The  metals,  to  do  this,  must  be  concentrated." 

And  where,  let  me  ask  common  sense,  the  laws  of  trade,  and  fiscal 
experience?  At  New  York,  the  London  of  America.  At  New 
York,  where  nearly  two-thirds  of  the  whole  of  our  revenue  is  col- 
lected, and  perhaps  more  than  that  proportion  of  our  imports  and 
commerce  concentrated ;  and  not  at  this  great  legislative  and  political 
emporium,  but  which,  with  all  its  just  fame  for  hospitality  and 
fashion,  has  not  so  many  vessels  as  it  has  hacks,  nor  so  much  revenue 
from  customs  as  will  pay  for  the  cigars  smoked  here. 

But,  in  the  face  of  this,  the  new  Fiscal  Bank  of  the  Secretary, 
which  is  to  relieve  the  exchanges,  and  commerce,  and  the  finances,  is 
to  be  located  where  neither  of  the  two  former  hardly  exist  at  all,  and 
almost  none  of  the  latter  accrues,  instead  of  being  located  at  the  cen- 
tre and  heart  of  our  whole  commercial  as  well  as  banking  and  fiscal 
operations. 

But  there  is  a  charm,  I  suppose,  with  the  paltry  change  of  name 
from  National  or  United  States  Bank  to  Fiscal  Bank;  and  this 
change  is  to  remove,  I  suppose,  all  constitutional  difficulties.  I  trust 
that  no  real  democrat  of  the  school  of  '98,  no  State  rights  politi- 
cian, can  be  gulled  by  any  such  simpleton  measure,  and  especially 
when  the  great  horror  of  the  Secretary's  friends  last  year  was  a  real 
fiscal  bank,  or  treasury  or  government  bank,  and  some  of  their  lofty 
banners  and  log-cabin  carousals  were  inscribed,  "No  Government 
Bank"  Such  is  a  part  of  the  " relief  to  be  anticipated,"  of  which 
the  President  speaks;  such  is  one  of  the  "measures  of  restoration 
and  relief  recommended  by  the  Secretary.  "  Restoration  !  "  Yes, 
I  fear  that  not  only  the  Bourbons  are  restored,  but  all  their  old  and 
exploded  principles.  But  no  more  of  this  now.  I  am  talking  too 
long,  I  fear,  on  some  of  these  marvellous  plans  for  relief. 

Let  me  end,  then,  by  a  summary  in  respect  to  them,  in  their  dif- 
ferent aspects,  as  measures  to  relieve  individuals — to  relieve  States  — 
to  relieve  the  General  Government. 

1.  It  proposes  to  relieve  individuals,  not  by  recommending  any 
bankrupt  law,  nor  by  the  President's  recommending  any, — which,  how- 
ever objectionable  in  many  other  respects,  would  certainly  relieve  one 
clas3  in  society,  the  debtors,  but  entirely  at  the  expense  of  another 
class,  the  creditors ;  —  nor  is  one  of  the  usual  modes  of  relief  recom- 
mended, by  reducing  the  tariff  and  taxes,  nor  another,  by  lessening  the 
burthen  of  any  public  debt  pressing  on  them ;  but  by  the  increase  of 
taxes,  or  the  tariff,  something  like  eight  or  ten  millions,  and  by  increas- 
ing the  debt  some  fifteen  or  twenty  millions  more.  This,  too,  when 
these  individuals  are  represented  to  be  already  suffering  under  heavy 
expenditures,  and  burthened  and  broken  down  by  the  mad  measures 


160  STATE    OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY. 

of  the  past  administration.  So  much  for  the  kind  of  relief  proposed  to 
individuals. 

2.  It  next  proposes  to  relieve  the  States,  by  giving  them  three  mil- 
lions in  distribution  from  the  lands,  and  taking  back  from  them,  on  this 
account,  from  three  to  four  millions,  by  increased  taxation  and  a  higher 
tariff.  Tins  is  contained  in  the  Secretary's  supplemental  report,  and 
strongly  in  the  President's  message,  as  one  of  the  measures  by  which 
the  country  may  once  more  return  "to  a  state  of  prosperity."  Yes, 
the  States  receiving  this  three  millions,  not  from  an  existing  surplus, 
but  to  be  supplied,  in  fact,  by  new  taxes,  under  an  increased  tariff,  are 
to  find  in  it  a  return  to  a  state  of  prosperity ;  because  they  will  be 
forced  to  pay  back  to  the  General  Government,  in  additional  duties,  not 
only  all  they  received,  —  pay  back  with  one  hand  what  they  received 
in  the  other, — but  pay  back  near  a  million  more,  to  cover  the  expenses 
and  losses  of  collecting  and  distributing  it.  Unfortunately,  too,  the 
President,  though  commendably  disclaiming  the  constitutional  power 
to  assume  State  debts,  or  pay  for  them  out  of  the  revenue  from  duties, 
justifies  this  distribution  of  the  public  lands,  as  virtually  within  the 
object  of  the  original  cession  of  them  from  the  States. 

In  haste  or  inadvertence,  he  overlooks  the  fact,  that  immense  quan- 
tities of  these  lands  were  never  ceded  by  the  States,  but  purchased  by 
us  of  foreign  nations,  and  paid  for  out  of  the  duties ;  because  the  net 
receipts  from  all  the  lands  since  1789  are  not  yet  equal  to  the 
expenditures  connected  with  them  by  eight  or  ten  millions  of  dollars. 
He  forgets,  then,  that,  in  distributing  the  proceeds  of  sales  in  Iowa, 
Missouri,  Arkansas,  Louisiana  and  Florida, — more  than  half  the  present 
proceeds, — we  are  virtually  distributing  the  proceeds  of  the  duties  paid 
for  them,  and  to  this  extent  assuming  State  debts.  I  can  but  entreat 
the  indebted  States  themselves  also  to  see  if  they  are  to  get  by  this 
three  millions  such  means  of  extinguishing  their  debts  as  the  President 
had  hastily  supposed. 

Let  the  indebted  States  look  to  the  operation  of  this  mode  of 
relief.  One  million,  out  of  the  three,  must  go  to  the  States  which 
are  not  in  debt ;  of  the  two  millions  distributed  to  the  indebted 
States,  one  million  will  be  absorbed  in  new  works,  repairs  of  old 
works,  &c,  and  one  million  will  be  left  for  the  payment  of  interest  — 
one-twelfth  of  the  whole  amount  of  the  annual  interest  due  from  the 
States.  What  sort  of  relief  is  this  ?  They  must,  in  this  condition, 
resort  to  their  own  retrenchment,  industry,  and  resources,  their  own 
prudence  and  energies,  if  the  three  millions  are  given,  or  never  get 
their  financial  wagon  out  of  the  mire.  They  may  call  on  Jupiter  till 
doomsday;  and  if  they  insist  on  permitting  Gettysburg  tapeworm 
roads  to  help  straight  ones  elsewhere,  to  begin  a  dozen  new  and  unim- 
portant canals  to  assist  forward  one  useful  work,  and  thus  never  com- 
plete any  of  them, — and  if  they  are  constantly  looking  to  others  for 
loans,  donations,  and  charitable  alms,  as  relief,  —  they  will  remain  dis- 


STATE    OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  161 

tressed  much  longer  than  the  commencement  of  this  and  the  other 
numerous  relief  measures  of  this  relief  administration. 

Another  new  project  for  their  relief,  proposed  by  the  Secretary,  was 
to  pay  the  States  the  fourth  instalment  under  the  deposite  act  of  1836. 
To  pay  the  States?  "We  owe  them  nothing.  We  deposited  with 
them  twenty-eight  millions,  to  be  returned  when  called  for ;  and  the 
Secretary,  instead  of  calling  for  the  return  of  the  money,  when  the 
exigencies  of  the  country  require  it,  proposes  to  give  them  nine  mil- 
lions more.  Was  there  any  surplus  from  which  this  sum  was  to  be 
taken  ?  No.  The  money  must  be  obtained  by  increased  taxation,  or 
a  large  burthensome  debt.  What  relief  was  there,  then,  in  this  opera- 
tion? We  take  nine  millions  from  the  treasury,  and,  to  replace  it, 
with  the  expenses  of  collection,  &c,  we  must  draw  ten  millions,  or 
more,  from  the  pockets  of  the  people,  by  duties  or  other  taxes. 

The  only  true  means  of  relief  are  industry,  frugality,  and  econ- 
omy, —  not  wild  schemes  of  distribution.  The  former  distribution 
or  deposite  scheme,  by  which  the  States  got  twenty-eight  millions,  was 
the  greatest  curse  that  ever  befell  them,  as  it  led  them  into  all  kinds 
of  extravagances  and  follies;  the  effects  of  which  would,  in  some 
degree,  be  felt  for  ages. 

And,  if  the  value  of  State  stocks  be  raised  in  the  end,  after  infinite 
distress,  it  will  not  be  for  the  benefit  of  the  States,  whose  agents  have 
sold  some  of  them  at  thirty  and  forty  per  cent,  sacrifice,  but  to  the 
benefit,  or  relief  and  profit,  of  the  nabob  speculators  on  both  sides  of 
the  Atlantic,  who  have  already  bought  them  at  a  discount  almost  equal 
to  the  old  soldiers'  certificates. 

Coupled  with  this  kind  of  relief  to  the  States,  is  the  further  opera- 
tion of  the  other  project  of  relief  to  them,  in  respect  to  their  currency, 
through  the  new  Fiscal  National  Bank,  of  thirty  or  fifty  millions  of 
capital,  which  will  rob  their  State  institutions  of  most  of  the  specie 
they  have  left ;  break  most  of  the  sound  banks  now  in  operation,  where 
it  can,  as  it  did  in  the  west  and  south-west,  from  1819  to  1824 ;  strip 
them  of  their  legitimate  business  and  profits :  reduce  prices,  as  it  did 
then,  ten  or  twenty  per  cent,  more,  and  bring  to  the  hammer  and  to 
ruin  half  the  property  left  of  those  in  any  way  indebted.  To  disregard 
this,  is  to  let  all  historical  warning  be  lost,  and  the  lessons  of  wisdom 
taught  in  our  own  annals  be  no  more  useful  than  an  old  almanac. 

But,  beyond  and  over  all  this  in  peril  to  the  States,  by  asking  and 
receiving  such  relief  from  the  General  Government  as  donations, 
instalments,  and  largesses  of  all  kinds,  is  the  radical  and  fatal  change 
thus  introduced  in  their  relations  to  that  government.  They  are,  by 
such  a  relief,  to  be  made  dependants  on  the  General  Government, 
instead  of  living,  as  now,  independent.  They  are  to  become  slaves 
instead  of  masters, — to  creep  and  cringe,  and  bow  here,  to  obtain  their 
yearly  supplies ;  and  thus,  for  a  mess  of  pottage,  for  which  they,  in 
another  way,  are  made  to  pay  more  than  the  value,  must  submit  to  be 
14* 


162  STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY. 

stripped  of  all  their  relative  power,  control,  and  sovereignty.  In  shun- 
ning Charybdis,  you  are  wrecked  on  Scylla. 

You  could  remedy  a  single  loss  of  a  few  thousands,  or  even  millions, 
of  money,  as  the  hair  cut  off  will  grow  again.  But  when  you  intro- 
duce a  new  principle  into  the  system,  erroneous,  poisonous,  pestilen- 
tial, how  is  it  to  be  resisted  by  the  very  party  overcome  and  pros- 
trated by  its  corrupting  influences  1  How  can  you  easily  rouse  once 
more,  in  the  willing  slave,  all  the  proud  feelings  and  aspirations  of  the 
free  1  How  can  the  lofty  twenty-six  sovereignties  that  compose  this 
Union,  after  once  succumbing  and  truckling  to  the  General  Govern- 
ment, and  demeaning  themselves  to  receive  bread  and  alms  at  its 
hands, — how  can  they  ever  regain  their  pristine  supremacy,  and  control 
the  encroachments  and  usurpations  of  the  great  central  consolidated 
power,  to  which  they  have  bent  the  knee  of  dependence  and  homage  ? 

A  great  central  consolidated  power,  thus  wielding  both  the  purse 
and  the  sword,  and  thus  armed  with  its  fiscal  agent,  and  capital 
enough  at  its  disposal  to  bribe  half  a  continent,  is,  to  be  sure,  to  lord  it 
here,  over  abject  States ;  but  time  only  can  show  whether  it  is  not  to 
be  controlled  and  to  move  itself,  by  the  slightest  nod  of  those  mer- 
chant kings,  or  monied  monarchs,  on  whichever  side  of  the  Atlantic, 
whose  influences  to  raise  the  prices  of  their  State  stocks  can  make 
palatable  measures  so  fatal  to  the  liberties  and  independence  of  the 
whole  country. 

So  much  for  the  relief  to  the  States. 

The  measures  proposed  in  this  report  are  lastly  advocated  on 
account  of  the  relief  they  are  likely  to  bring  to  the  General  Govern- 
ment, pretended  to  be  involved  in  debt  and  wasteful  expenditure, 
though  it  has  paid  every  due  promptly  and  in  specie,  and  is  in  so  high 
credit  as  to  be  sought  for  as  a  guarantee  by  others.  It  is  to  relieve 
this  government  by  stripping  it  of  three  millions  of  its  present 
revenues;  by  adding  many  millions  to  its  expenses;  by  creating  a 
large  and  permanent  national  debt  of  twenty  to  forty  millions ;  by 
virtually  giving  nine  millions  more,  in  the  fourth  instalment,  to  the 
States ;  and  by  repealing,  in  the  sub-treasury,  the  great  barrier  against 
the  use  of  non-specie-paying  banks,  and  depreciated,  irredeemable 
bank  paper,  to  destroy  our  credit,  and  cause  public  as  well  as  private 
losses  to  an  incalculable  amount. 

This  is  the  relief  to  the  General  Government. 

I,  for  one,  say,  as  respects  my  individual  State,  or  United  States 
relations,  I  ask  no  such  political  nostrums, —  no  relief,  except  in  the 
old-fashioned  mode  of  greater  frugality  in  expenses,  greater  aversion 
to  and  freedom  from  debt,  greater  industry,  temperance,  and 
morality  in  society ;  and  much  less  do  I  ask  for  any  of  the  kinds  of 
relief  which  this  extraordinary  report  and  its  extraordinary  recom- 
mendations would  bring  to  us. 

And  if  the  brave  Granite  Republic,  whose  interests  I  have  the 
honor  to  represent  in  part  here,  should  deem  it  inexpedient,  unconsti- 


STATE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  163 

tutional,  or  dangerous  to  public  liberty,  to  approve  these  measures, — 
and  should  refuse  to  accept  of  beggarly  and  insulting  alms,  which  she 
never  asked  for,  and  which  are  to  be  wrung  from  the  hard  earnings 
of  her  own  people,  and  by  increased  taxes  on  their  own  comforts,  if  not 
necessaries  of  life, —  let  me  tell  you,  sir,  that  she  will  not  be  cajoled 
nor  dragooned  into  acquiescence,  by  being  told,  as  she  is,  in  one 
clause  of  the  Secretary's  reformed  bank  charter,  that  you  will  still 
force  from  her  this  tributary  tax,  and  bestow  the  proceeds  on  others, 
more  supple  and  menial. 


STATE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.* 


It  would  seem,  sir,  from  the  pause  in  this  debate,  that  the  motion 
to  print  is  about  to  be  put.  But,  as  the  objection  to  it  was  first  offered 
by  me,  with  a  view  to  expose  some  of  the  numerous  errors  with  which 
the  report  abounds,  and  as  the  senator  from  Maine  has  replied  to  a 
portion  of  my  remarks,  it  might  be  supposed  that  I  acquiesced  in  the 
sufficiency  of  his  explanations,  if  I  did  not  now  express  a  contrary 
opinion. 

I  hasten,  therefore,  to  say,  sir,  that  his  explanations  are  not  satis- 
factory, either  as  to  details  or  general  principles.  They  do  not  attempt 
to  answer  my  exposition  of  several  of  the  most  glaring  mistakes  in 
the  report ;  and,  in  almost  every  instance  where  any  attempt  is  made, 
it  fails  entirely,  or  plunges  the  Secretary  into  a  new  difficulty.  One 
cause  of  the  embarrassment  of  the  senator,  as  to  details,  arises  from 
their  inherent  irreconcilable  character,  and  another  from  the  hasty 
and  inadvertent  manner  in  which  many  of  them  have  been  presented 
by  the  Secretary,  whether  in  the  report  or  in  the  fiscal  portion  of  the 
message.  Hence,  taking  the  exj:>lanations  given,  still  the  whole  dis- 
crepancies and  contradictions,  as  respects  the  figures,  are  only  changed 
to  new  amounts,  but  not  entirely  removed  in  a  solitary  case. 

In  truth,  there  is  no  way  possible  to  reconcile  many  of  the  varia- 
tions, and  it  might  be  as  prudent  for  him,  first  as  last,  to  admit  them 
to  be  clearly  inexplicable. 

In  the  next  place,  as  to  the  great  general  conclusions  in  the  report 
concerning  deficits  and  debt,  there  is  no  easy  mode  of  removing  the 
whole  doubt  about  their  true  amount,  because  the  Secretary  has 

*  A  speech  in  reply  to  Mr.  Evans,  on  the  motion  to  print  an  extra  number  of  the 
Report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury;  delivered  in  the  United  States  Senate,  June 
18,1841. 


164  STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY. 

mingled  and  confounded  several  items,  which  should  have  been  kept 
perfectly  apart. 

I  am  not  surprised,  therefore,  that  the  learned  senator,  with  all  his 
experience  on  a  financial  committee,  has  met  with  no  better  success  in 
bringing  light  out  of  darkness,  or  groping  a  way  out  of  the  labyrinth. 

Thus,  for  one  instance :  the  Secretary,  in  order  to  give  an  inflated 
appearance  to  the  aggregate  of  appropriations  not  spent  on  the  4th  of 
March  last,  and  of  the  expenditures  likely  to  happen  under  them 
during  1841',  has  first  jumbled  together  what  should  have  been,  and 
usually  is,  stated  separately, —  the  appropriations  and  expenditures  for 
the  current  service,  and  those  for  treasury  notes.  Thus,  at  the  start, 
he  probably  deceived  and  misled  even  himself,  in  respect  to  the  exag- 
gerated amount  of  some  of  his  results. 

If  he  had  kept  them  distinct,  as  is  customary,  most  palpably  there 
would  not  have  been  so  much  trouble  in  ascertaining  their  amount, 
their  urgency,  and  the  necessity  there  was  for  the  call  of  an  extra 
session  of  Congress.  What  we  wanted  to  know  was,  whether,  if  the 
expenditures  were  confined  to  existing  appropriations,  there  would  be 
a  deficit  in  the  treasury ;  and  whether  we  were  called  together,  at  this 
inconvenient  season  of  the  year,  and  at  so  much  expense  to  the  States 
and  the  Union,  to  supply  a  deficiency  occasioned  by  the  old  adminis- 
tration, or  to  be  occasioned  by  adopting  the  recommendations  of  the 
new  one.  The  Secretary  does  not  say,  as  any  business  man  would 
say,  in  a  similar  situation  in  private  life,  "  I  owe  so  much ;  and  I  want 
to  spend,  in  addition,  so  much."  If  he  had  done  so,  he  would  have 
found  that  his  estimates  of  expenditures,  under  the  old  or  existing 
appropriations,  were  too  high,  by  five  millions  of  dollars. 

He  proposes  to  expend  twenty-three  millions,  whereas  the  appropri- 
ations by  Congress,  for  the  service  of  the  year,  were  but  about  eighteen 
millions.  Now,  he  (Mr.  W.)  would  assert,  without  fear  of  contradic- 
tion, that  a  reference  to  the  records  of  the  department  would  show 
scarcely  a  single  instance,  for  the  last  twenty-six  years,  where  the 
expenditures  of  the  year  exceeded  by  one  million  of  dollars  the 
amount  of  new  and  permanent  appropriations  by  Congress  for  that 
year.  And  yet  the  Secretary  proposes  to  expend,  during  the  present 
year,  near  five  millions  of  dollars  more  than  the  appropriations  already 
made  by  Congress  for  the  whole  year. 

Mr.  Woodbury  then  quoted,  from  an  official  document,  the  appropri- 
ations and  expenditures  for  a  number  of  years  back,  which  showed 
that  in  every  year  except  1839  (which  was  about  one  million  the  other 
way)  the  expenditures  were  considerably  less  than  the  new  and  per- 
manent appropriations ;  and  said  that  it  was  the  invariable  practice  of 
the  department,  formerly,  to  take  the  amount  of  the  new  and  perma- 
nent appropriations  as  their  estimate  of  the  amount  of  expenditures 
for  the  year.  He  ventured  to  assert  that,  from  Hamilton  to  Gallatin, 
and  from  Gallatin  to  Duane,  this  would  be  found  to  have  been  the 
practice;  and  yet  the  present  Secretary  has,  at  one  bound,  estimated  his 


STATE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  165 

expenditures  at  five  millions  more  than  the  appropriations  for  the 
whole  year.  This  amount  of  expenditure  cannot  be  effected  in  any 
legitimate  way  ;  it  can  only  be  done  by  hastening  appropriations  into 
expenditures,  without  any  regard  to  public  economy,  or  by  putting 
large  amounts  into  the  hands  of  disbursing  officers,  who  will  deposit  it 
in  banks  which  want  the  use  of  the  public  funds,  and  there  the  money 
will  be  banked  on,  and  furnish  accommodation  to  speculators  and  poli- 
ticians, in  and  out  of  Congress.  Now,  this  mode  of  hastening  expend- 
itures, for  the  mere  purpose  of  creating  a  deficit  in  the  treasury  at  the 
end  of  the  year,  was,  in  his  opinion,  neither  wise  nor  expedient.  There 
was  also  a  way  of  diminishing  the  receipts  of  the  treasury.  These 
might  be  affected,  to  a  considerable  extent,  by  the  advice  given  by  the 
Secretary  to  the  President  in  relation  to  the  public  lands.  He  (Mr. 
Woodbury)  would  ask  how  many  public  land  sales  had  been  advertised 
by  the  new  administration,  during  the  three  months  that  it  has  been  in 
power.  Have  there  been  ten  ?  have  there  been  five  1  have  there  been 
three  ?  Whereas,  in  the  same  period,  during  the  preceding  adminis- 
tration, you  will  find  nearly  twenty.  But  the  nursing  of  his  resources, 
and  the  curtailment  of  his  expenditures,  may  have  been  prevented  by 
other  pressing  and  more  important  avocations  of  the  Secretary ;  he 
has,  as  Bolingbroke  said,  on  his  accession  to  power,  in  the  quotation 
made  the  other  day,  friends  at  Ins  elbow  to  reward,  and  enemies  to 
punish ;  and,  to  do  this  efficiently,  he  has  called  in  a  star  chamber 
inquisition  to  his  aid. 

How  he  and  the  rest  of  the  administration  are  to  prosper  under  it, 
in  this  land  of  courts  and  juries,  —  of  accusations  to  be  first  drawn  up 
and  notice  given,  of  witnesses  to  confront  the  accused,  and  of  a  pre- 
vious hearing  by  counsel,  before  condemnation,  —  how  all  tins  new 
importation  from  European  despotisms,  into  our  republican  system, 
is  to  work  in  our  boasted  land  of  liberty  and  laws,  remains  yet  to  be 
seen. 

Had  the  report  stated  the  aggregate  of  existing  appropriations  for 
the  current  service  on  the  4th  of  March  distinct  from  those  for  the 
redemption  of  treasury  notes,  had  it  kept  those  already  made  distinct 
from  those  he  wished  to  be  made  in  future,  and  had  it  preserved  all 
those  to  be  expended  in  the  next  three  months  distinct  under  each 
general  head,  the  Secretary  would  probably  have  been  struck  with  the 
unusual  amount  of  some  of  them,  and  detected  the  exaggeration.  He 
must  have  started  back  at  some  of  the  strange  results,  and  discovered 
the  over-estimates  put  on  him  by  other  officers,  or  fallen  into  carelessly, 
through  his  own  hasty  and  confused  manner  of  mixing  up  matters 
wholly  separate  in  their  character. 

Another  illustration,  besides  that  formerly  given  as  to  the  mistakes 
of  the  Secretary,  in  relation  to  the  expenses  under  existing  appropria- 
tions for  the  year,  lays  in  almost  a  nutshell.  In  the  statement,  it  will 
be  perceived,  I  have  used  only  round  numbers. 

Thus  the  year  1841  began  with  available  funds  in  money,  including 


166  STATE  OP  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY. 

what  was  in  the  mint,  equal  to  near  $1,000,000.  There  were  received 
from  customs  in  two  months,  and  estimated  by  him  to  be  afterwards 
received  from  the  same  source  in  the  next  ten  months,  about  $14,000,- 
000.  There  were  received  from  lands  in  the  first  two  months,  and 
estimated  by  him  for  the  next  ten,  near  $3,000,000.  Estimated  and 
received  in  the  first  two  months,  and  next  ten,  from  banks  and  miscel- 
laneous sources,  $220,000.  Now,  the  receipts  from  customs  and 
lands,  if  the  last  should  be  properly  advertised,  are  under-estimated  at 
least,  $1,500,000.  So  are  the  receipts  from  deposit  banks,  and  the 
United  States  Bank,  quite  $150,000.  These  make  an  aggregate  of 
$19,870,000.  The  department  had,  besides  this,  a  power  to  issue 
more  notes  under  the  old  act,  beside  what  were  paid  in  till  the  30th 
of  March,  near  $400,000.  And  it  had  the  power,  under  the  new  act, 
to  issue,  before  the  4th  of  March,  about  $673,000,  and  after  the  4th, 
$5,000,000.  These  made  all  the  available  resources  for  the  year 
$25,943,000.  Now,  if  he  expended  out  of  the  existing  and  perma- 
nent appropriations  only  an  amount  equal  to  the  whole  new  ones, 
calling  them  $18,000,000  (and  they  differed  either  way  not  a  third 
of  a  milhon),  it  would  pay  them,  and  leave  to  him  $7,943,000. 
This  would  be  enough  to  redeem  all  the  old  treasury  notes  out  at 
the  beginning  of  the  year,  being  about  $4,600,000,  and  leave  a 
balance  of  $3,343,000.  These  were  all  the  notes  likely  to  be  paid 
in,  and  all  which  fell  due ;  and  quite  one-fourth  of  a  million  of  them, 
for  reasons  explained  the  other  day,  would  probably  not  come  in 
during  1841,— $250,000,— thus  raising  the  balance  to  $3,593,000. 
This  balance,  then,  would  cover  all  contingencies  and  fluctuations  in 
expenses  and  receipts  not  very  extraordinary.  It  would,  also,  enable 
him  even  to  spend  the  maximum  suggested  last  December,  of  twenty 
millions  (or  two  more),  and  still  have  on  hand  quite  $1,593,000  ;  — 
this  would  be  the  natural  result  on  the  existing  appropriations. 

It  is  worthy  of  remark  here,  that,  in  this  view  of  the  subject,  with- 
out including  any  expenses  or  appropriations  of  this  extraordinary  ses- 
sion (as  should  be  the  case  when  looking  to  the  question  of  the  prior 
necessity  for  calling  it),  there  would  be  neither  debt  nor  deficit  to  be 
provided  for  during  the  whole  of  the  present  year,  —  much  less  the 
ensuing  three  months. 

Again:  there  would  be,  even  next  year,  no  debt  becoming  due, 
except  the  new  treasury  notes  issued  in  1841,  over  and  above  the 
amount  redeemed.  This  would  be  about  $6,000,000;  from  that 
deduct  the  above  balance  on  hand,  and  the  net  burden  next  year 
would  be,  from  this  source,  short  of  $4,500,000. 

Leaving,  however,  in  the  treasury,  1st  January,  1842,  a  balance 
somewhat  smaller  than  when  1841  began,  or  only  about  one-quarter 
of  a  million,  including  what  is  in  the  mint. 

It  may  be  next  a  matter  of  wonder  how  the  Secretary  could  reach 
a  result  so  different  from  this,  —  how  he  reached  the  conclusion,  that 
both  the  debt  and  deficit  of  this  and  the  ensuing  year,  when  united. 


STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY.  167 

should  be  over  twelve  millions,  or  something  more  than  my  calculation 
of  what  would  be  likely,  if  acting  in  a  manner  necessary  and  usual,  by 
about  $7,500,000. 

But  I  can  render  it  perfectly  intelligible  to  the  Senate,  in  a  single 
moment,  how  his  excess  arose ;  and,  though  he  may  make  it  occur  in 
the  end,  yet  it  will  be  seen  on  what  unsubstantial  ground  it  is  sought 
to  be  justified.  Thus,  he  computes  his  expenditures,  under  the  exist- 
ing appropriations,  higher  than  is  customary,  on  a  given  amount  of 
them,  by  $5,000,000,  and  higher  than  should  be,  under  all  contin- 
gencies, by  $3,000,000.  Then  he  computes  expenditures  under  new 
appropriations,  prepared  either  in  his  three  or  ten  months'  estimates, 
and  which  have  not  been  made,  may  not  be,  and  would  not  have  been, 
this  year,  except  for  this  extra  session,  over  $3,000,000.  Then  he 
estimates  his  receipts  from  customs  and  lands  too  low,  as  we  hereto- 
fore explained,  by  at  least  $1,500,000 ;  and  these  account  for  the 
whole  difference  of  $7,500,000. 

Besides  this,  there  were  other  excesses  in  expenditure,  and  under- 
estimates in  receipts,  to  very  considerable  amounts,  in  his  computa- 
tions, as  formerly  detailed,  but  which  need  not  be  repeated  here.  In 
this  way  goes  by  the  board  his  whole  deficit  of  near  six  millions,  and 
the  debt  and  deficit  for  this  and  the  ensuing  year  of  about  twelve  mil- 
lions, with  the  mistaken  and  inflated  phantom  debt  of  thirty-one  or 
forty  millions,  and  leaves  behind  only  the  small  fragment  of  treasury 
notes  which  may  fall  due  next  year,  over  and  above  the  balance  in  the 
treasury.  That  is  likely  to  equal,  if  no  new  appropriations  are  made, 
and  the  old  ones  spent  no  more  rapidly  than  usual,  only  about  four 
millions  and  a  half. 

This  is  the  molehill  which  has  been  swollen  by  whig  rhetoric  so 
often  into  a  mountain.  And  even  this  would  have  been  all  extin- 
guished, had  Congress  seasonably,  as  was  again  and  again  urged, 
stopped  the  immense  new  drains  on  the  revenue  by  new  judicial  con- 
structions, and  modified  the  drawbacks  so  as  to  conform  to  their  orig- 
inal principle.  It  would,  also,  all  have  been  easily  paid  in  1841,  had  the 
United  States  Bank  not  failed  again, —  totally  and  forever,  it  is  feared, 
since  the  year  began, —  and  strewed  the  whole  country  with  fragments 
of  wreck,  as  well  as  given  a  deadly  stab,  for  a  time,  to  our  credit 
abroad,  and  to  foreign  confidence  in  American  integrity. 

Yet  the  past  administration  is  taunted  with  a  debt,  though  in  reality 
so  diminutive,  and  though  created,  if  at  all,  only  by  accident  and 
procrastination  in  necessary  legislation,  as  well  as  by  malconduct  in 
banks.  Taunted,  too,  in  this  report,  which,  with  its  supplement,  pro- 
poses to  create  deliberately,  designedly,  and  without  any  urgent  neces- 
sity, under  the  new  retrenching  administration,  a  further  new,  perma- 
nent national  debt,  of  twenty-eight  or  thirty  millions. 

This,  then,  is  the  attitude  of  the  two  administrations  on  this  sub- 
ject. The  past  one,  charged  again  and  again,  in  most  wanton 
virulence,  as  having  caused  a  debt  of  forty  millions,  instead  of  four 


168  STATE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   TKEASURY. 

to  five ;  and  the  present  reforming  one,  which  brings  the  groundless 
charge,  recommending  a  new  debt  of  twenty-eight  or  thirty  millions, 
instead  of  only  four  or  five. 

That  administration  adjured  Congress  to  be  sparing  in  appropria- 
tions, and  to  revise  the  tariff  laws  in  season  to  prevent  any  permanent 
debt  whatever  in  a  time  of  peace ;  while  this  one,  on  the  contrary, 
with  careful  deliberation,  and  in  time  of  peace  with  all  foreign  powers, 
recommends  a  new,  permanent,  voluntary  debt,  of  near  thirty  millions. 
The  former  followed  the  lessons  and  wisdom  of  ages  on  this  subject,  as 
condensed  by  Mr.  Gallatin,  in  his  late  interesting  pamphlet  on  the 
banks  and  the  currency.  "  A  public  debt  (says  he,  pages  28  and  29) 
was  always  an  evil  to  be  avoided,  whenever  practicable ;  hardly  ever 
justifiable,  except  in  time  of  war.  It  has  a  tendency,  perhaps,  more 
than  any  other  cause,  to  concentrate  the  national  wealth  into  the 
hands  of  a  small  number  of  individuals ; "  —  "  and  it  feeds  the  drones 
of  society." 

But  the  present  administration  disregards  the  sages  of  other  times, 
and  even  the  admonitions  of  that  financier,  once  such  an  oracle  with 
the  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Finance.  The  past  administration 
—  or  rather  the  person  who  now  addresses  you  —  is  also  threatened 
here,  by  the  senator  from  Maine,  with  having  deserved  impeachment, 
because,  under  what  his  party  has  denounced  as  prodigal  misrule,  I 
deemed  it  a  duty  to  remonstrate  against  any  attempt  to  advance  money, 
except  for  short  periods  and  in  limited  amounts ;  or  to  expend  it  by 
subordinate  officers,  either  wastefully  or  prematurely ;  —  while  the 
present  administration  —  the  boasted  reformers  —  seem  ardent  to  jus- 
tify the  new  Secretary  in  letting  it  be  advanced  as  any  person  may 
desire,  either  as  to  time  or  amount,  and  be  expended  in  all  kinds  of  pro- 
fusion, so  as  to  produce,  in  only  twelve  months,  an  excess  of  expenditure 
over  what  is  customary  equalling  near  five  millions  of  dollars.  Under 
this  retrenching  and  frugal  administration,  I  am,  it  seems,  to  be  punished 
for  my  labors  and  watchfulness  to  promote  saving,  and  to  check  lavish 
waste ;  while  my  successor,  for  the  opposite  course,  is  to  be  puffed  and 
idolized.  So  be  it.  History  must,  after  a  time,  be  set  right  on  this 
and  several  other  topics. 

I  would  stop  here,  sir,  were  it  not  that  my  silence,  in  not  replying 
to  several  portions  of  the  speech  of  the  senator  from  Maine,  might  be 
considered  a  left-handed  compliment  to  its  ability,  as  not  being  suf- 
ficient, in  my  opinion,  to  deserve  notice,  and  were  not  some  of  his 
statements  singularly  erroneous.  I  shall,  therefore,  from  my  notes, 
advert  to  a  few  of  his  remarks,  as  hastily  penned  down. 

In  the  outset,  I  disclaim  all  his  commendations  for  what  he  is  pleased 
to  call  the  elaborate  character  of  my  computations,  as  I  was  more 
desirous,  some  days  ago,  to  submit  my  objections,  than  the  Secretary's 
friends  appeared  to  be  to  have  the  report  scrutinized, — probably  from 
a  conviction  of  its  numerous  imperfections. 

If,    as  the  senator  seems  to  suppose,  any  peculiar  anxiety  was 


STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY.  169 

betrayed  anywhere,  in  respect  to  the  discussion,  I  am  not  aware  that 
it  existed  on  this  side  of  the  House. 

He  next  admits  that  all  I  read  from  the  report  tending  to  produce 
an  impression  that  the  " legacy  of  debt"  created  and  left  by  the  past 
administration  on  the  shoulders  of  the  present  is  equal  to  forty  mil- 
lions, or  even  thirty-one  millions,  has  been  misunderstood  by  many  of 
his  political  friends,  and  that  their  conclusion  is  entirely  unfounded  or 
false.  So  be  it.  The  senator  from  Maine  admitted  expressly  that  he 
(Mr.  W.)  had  been  fighting  phantoms,  when  he  had  exposed  the  hum- 
bug of  the  forty  million  debt.  Is  it,  then,  at  last  discovered  that  this 
forty  million  debt  of  Mr.  Van  Buren's  administration,  which  had  been 
the  theme  of  every  whig  orator  throughout  the  Union, — which  had 
been  rung  from  valley  to  hill- top, — discussed  at  cross-roads  and  the  bars 
of  village  ale-houses, —  that  this  is  a  phantom  —  an  ignis  fatuas  ? 
Yes  :  this  is  now  a  phantom,  which  has  even  been  asserted  by  author- 
ity as  high  as  the  executive  chair  of  this  nation,  and  has  been  circulated, 
far  and  wide,  by  men  of  intelligence,  whose  character,  in  other  respects, 
would  induce  a  belief  of  their  conviction  of  its  truth. 

The  thirty-one  millions  of  excess  in  expenditure  over  the  receipts 
from  1837  to  1841  figured  so  largely  and  loosely  in  this  report,  that 
Mr.  E wing's  supporters,  in  many  places,  exulted  that  he  had  officially 
proved  the  existence  of  a  debt  to  that  extent.  They  even  quoted  his 
aggregate  down  to  his  cents,  as  exemplified  in  one  of  the  former 
extracts,  in  these  words  :  — 

"Keep  it  before  the  People  —  That  it  is  now  officially  announced  that  the 
national  debt  incurred  by  Mr.  Van  Buren,  during  the  four  years  of  his  administra- 
tion, amounts  to  thirty-one  millions,  three  hundred  and  ten  thousand,  fourteen 
dollars  and  twenty  cents." 

But  now, —  most  gratifying  result,  in  the  face  of  the  assembled 
Senate,  and  before  the  whole  country, —  the  senator  from  Maine 
frankly  admits  that  this  enormous  national  debt  was  all  a  phantom. 
If  his  (Mr.  W's)  remarks  had  produced  no  other  result,  that  discovery 
was  a  sufficient  reward  for  his  labors. 

Mr.  Woodbury  then  commented  on  that  portion  of  the  report  which 
recommended,  as  a  permanent  balance  in  the  treasury,  the  sum  of 
four  millions,  and  said  that,  with  the  power  to  issue  treasury  notes,  one 
million  was  abundant ;  and  so  the  senator  from  Maine  ought  to  con- 
fess. The  experience  of  the  past  three  or  four  years  had  fully  verified 
this ;  and  even  half  a  million  would  answer,  instead  of  having  four 
millions  borrowed  on  interest,  and,  after  the  sub-treasury  is  repealed, 
lying  idle  in  banks,  so  that  they  could  bank  and  speculate  on  it  at  our 
risk  and  cost. 

Mr.  Ewing  himself  is  compelled  to  admit  that  one  million  is  enough, 

while  the  power  to  issue  treasury  notes  continues  ;  and  that  power,  we 

all  know,  remains  till  another  year,  to  a  certain  extent.     So  the  small 

scattered  sums,  in  numerous  places,  which  the  gentleman  considers  so 

15 


170  STATE    OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY. 

useless  and  ineffective,  are,  when  coupled  with  the  power  to  issue  such 
notes,  fully  operative  for  various  local  expenditures  of  a  minor  charac- 
ter. When  larger  sums  are  needed  near,  then,  and  not  till  then,  notes 
are  issued  and  put  on  interest,  and,  being  at  or  above  par,  supply  the 
deficiency,  to  the  convenience,  economy,  and  satisfaction,  of  all  con- 
cerned. 

But,  among  my  other  sins  while  in  the  treasury  department,  called 
up  in  judgment  against  me  by  the  senator, —  and  not  now,  I  believe, 
for  the  first  time, —  is  the  issue  of  these  treasury  notes  at  all,  instead 
of  a  resort  to  a  high  tariff,  or  permanent  national  debt.  I  am  grat- 
ified that  the  gentleman  thus  gives  me  an  opportunity  to  pay  off  a  few 
old  scores,  which,  as  I  am  in  favor  of  punctuality,  economy,  and  short 
settlements,  I  improve  the  first  opportunity  to  do  which  is  afforded, 
and  hope,  in  this  manner,  amicably  to  balance  our  accounts. 

These  notes,  he  says,  were  generally  called  for  by  the  department 
without  full  notice,  after  much  delay,  and  when  no  leisure  was 
allowed  to  provide  anything  better.  Congress,  he  intimates,  was  thus 
forced  to  vote  for  them  in  haste,  and  reluctantly,  when  the  circum- 
stances of  the  country  and  of  the  treasury  indicated  a  large  permanent 
deficiency,  and  not  a  temporary  one,  as  pretended,  and  which  per- 
manent deficiency  required  a  funded  debt,  or  increased  taxes. 

Now,  as  to  the  first  allegation,  that  treasury  notes  are  not  appro- 
priate fiscal  instruments  in  the  emergencies  of  the  few  past  years,  and 
have  not  been  prudently  used  by  the  department,  I  will  take  the  liberty 
to  refer  him  to  Mr.  Gallatin,  a  financier  possibly  quite  as  high  an 
authority  and  as  long  in  experience  in  these  matters  as  any  of  the 
croakers  who  have  so  flippantly  assailed  me  on  this  account. 

It  was  in  September,  1837,  that  these  notes  were  first  recommended 
by  me  to  be  issued.  It  was  during  a  suspension  of  specie  payments 
almost  universal,  and  under  a  temporary  deficiency  of  revenue,  as  I 
shall  soon  demonstrate. 

In  the  pamphlet  before  referred  to,  Mr.  Gallatin,  page  87,  in  a  note, 
observes,  as  to  treasury  notes,  that  — 

*«  Used  as  soberly  as  they  have  been  of  late  years  by  the  treasury  department,  and 
provided  they  are  kept  at  par,  they  are  the  most  convenient  mode  of  supplying  a  tem- 
porary deficiency  in  revenue,  as  well  as  the  most  convenient  substitute  for  currency 
in  the  payment  of  duties." 

Thus,  it  seems,  by  a  disinterested  and  most  intelligent  financier, 
and  at  the  same  time  a  political  opponent,  that  I  recommended  these 
notes  under  the  proper  circumstances ;  that  I  used  them  soberly,  and, 
as  the  annals  of  the  country  will  show,  kept  them  at  par,  and  often 
above  par ;  and  furnished  very  great  facilities  to  the  community  in 
large  public  payments,  as  well  as  in  distant  commercial  transfers  and 
exchanges. 

Congress,  too,  after  various  trials,  have  continued  to  sanction  my 
views,  though  the  gentleman  complains,  next,  that  I  have  deluded  them 


STATE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  171 

into  these  measures  without  giving  due  notice.  Had  I  induced  Con- 
gress, in  this  way,  to  adopt  a  good  measure,  when  they  otherwise  would 
have  substituted  for  it  an  inappropriate  and  bad  one,  the  public  suffer- 
ing thereby  would  certainly  not  have  been  such  as  to  justify  much 
complaint. 

But  as  it  would  not  have  looked  entirely  above-board  and  honorable 
in  me  to  pursue  a  good  end  by  indirect  means,  I  throw  back  the  twice 
or  thrice  repeated  imputation  made  in  these  halls,  and  pronounce  it  not 
only  unfounded,  but  directly  contradicted  by  our  own  official  records. 
So  far  from  delaying  to  give  notice,  the  first  act  which  passed  in  Octo- 
ber, 1837,  was  called  for  by  the  department,  in  the  very  first  commu- 
nication it  could  make  to  Congress,  when  it  met  in  September. 

[Mr.  Woodbury  here  turned  to  his  report  on  that  occasion.] 

The  next  act,  in  1838,  authorized  no  new  ones,  but  merely  changed 
the  form  or  restriction,  so  that  others  could  be  issued  to  a  certain 
amount,  instead  of  old  notes  paid  in  before  the  year  expired  in  which, 
on  their  face,  they  were  payable.  Even  this  alteration  would  not  have 
been  needed,  had  the  bill  passed  as  originally  reported  and  recom- 
mended by  the  department,  with  power  to  reissue,  within  the  year, 
the  notes  paid  in  before  the  year  expired.  But  some  wise  Neckar  in 
the  other  wing  of  the  capitol  moved  a  prohibition  to  that,  and  did  not 
allow,  instead  of  it,  any  power,  within  the  year,  to  issue  new  notes  in 
place  of  the  old  ones.  Thus,  the  whole  object  of  a  temporary  loan  or 
credit  for  one  year  was  likely  to  be  defeated,  unless  the  notes  were 
put  on  the  highest  rates  of  interest ;  and  the  treasury  was  exposed  to 
be  left  with  a  mere  cloud,  instead  of  substance,  as  all  the  notes,  once 
issued,  might  come  back  in  a  single  month. 

The  next  act,  passed  in  March,  1839,  merely  extended  the  period 
of  issue  till  the  30th  of  June  in  that  year ;  and  the  propriety  of  some 
remedial  measure,  like  that,  against  fluctuations  and  contingencies,  was 
urged  in  the  annual  report  in  December  previous,  instead  of  being 
thrown  before  Congress  without  due  notice. 

[Mr.  Woodbury  here  read,  from  the  annual  report  in  December 
previous,  extracts  to  that  effect.] 

Only  one  other  act  passed  till  the  law  now  in  force,  and  that  was  in 
March,  1840  ;  and  that,  or  some  other  efficient  measure,  to  cover  fluc- 
tuations and  contingencies,  was  urged  strenuously  in  the  previous 
annual  report,  as  long  before  as  December,  1839. 

So  was  it  in  respect  to  the  existing  act  passed  in  February  last. 
The  grounds  of  that,  or  some  other  remedial  measure,  which  Congress 
might  prefer,  were  all  fully  disclosed  in  the  previous  annual  report, 
two  or  three  months  before. 

[Mr.  Woodbury  here  read  such  extracts  from  both  reports.] 

So  that  the  gentleman's  reiterated  charge,  on  tins  point,  of  not  giv- 
ing due  notice,  is  refuted  by  the  record  itself.  But  I  can  see  how  he 
has  been  led  into  an  erroneous  belief  of  its  correctness.  He  has  heard 
the  misrepresentation  so  often  repeated  by  others,  that,  like  Sancho 


172  STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY. 

Panza's  impressions  in  that  way,  from  his  own  repetitions  of  his  own 
fabrications,  he  begins  to  believe  the  misrepresentations  of  others  to  be 
true.  But,  if  he  had  only  turned  back  in  his  own  mind  to  other  cir- 
cumstances, as  well  as  to  the  annual  reports,  he  would  have  found  that 
there  were  still  different  reasons  to  account  for  his  misconception,  and 
to  show  it  to  be  a  palpable  error.  In  almost  every  instance,  except 
the  first  issue  of  notes  in  1837,  many  members  of  Congress  became  so 
engaged  in  the  more  interesting  employment  of  embarrassing  the  per- 
sons in  power,  and  forming  new  combinations  to  put  others  in  their 
places,  that  the  recommendations  of  the  President  even,  and  much 
more  those  of  the  departments,  were  generally  assailed  by  many  of 
those  then  in  opposition,  and  delayed  and  thwarted  in  every  possible 
method.  From  that  circumstance,  and  having  the  inclination  in  respect 
to  the  finances,  as  I  had  in  respect  to  the  receivers,  —  which  has  been 
also  complained  of,  and  will  be  soon  noticed, — not  to  let  the  public  credit 
be  violated  while  in  my  charge,  and  any  just  cause  be  given  to  call 
the  treasury  bankrupt,  I  took  the  liberty  to  make  other  and  additional 
communications  to  the  proper  committees,  and,  at  times,  even  to  Con- 
gress itself. 

Those  new  communications  recalled  to  their  attention  the  former 
ones,  and  urged  prompter  action.  It  is  those  that  the  senator  has 
inadvertently  seized  on,  if  anything,  as  the  first  suggestions  made  by 
me ;  when,  in  truth,  they  were  the  last ;  and  when  they  had  become 
necessary,  not  by  my  delay  to  make  early  and  earnest  recommenda- 
tions on  this  subject,  but  by  the  delay  of  Congress  to  act  on  the  reme- 
dial measures  proposed,  —  measures,  indeed,  which  often  failed  to  be 
adopted  in  season,  solely  because  it  was  the  policy  of  the  party  with 
which  the  senator  himself  acted,  as  avowed  by  its  distinguished  leader 
in  the  east,  since  rewarded  with  the  official  spoils  of  prime  minister, 
to  oppose  everything  and  propose  nothing. 

But  the  senator  says  the  remedy  which  finally  was  adopted  should 
have  been  a  permanent  increase  of  the  tariff,  or  a  permanent  debt. 
Then,  I  ask,  why  was  it  not  so  shaped  during  the  ample  time,  — the 
months  he  and  others  had  the  recommendations  before  them,  and  were 
delaying  action. 

But,  as  a  further  proof  that  there  is  no  foundation  for  the  impres- 
sion he  now  entertains,  that  the  issue  of  treasury  notes  was  the  wrong 
measure  for  the  occasion,  we  have  not  only  Mr.  Gallatin's  deliberate 
opinion  against  him,  and  the  deliberate  opinion  of  Congress  during 
four  years  against  him,  but  the  result  of  experience,  showing  that, 
even  yet,  no  change  in  the  tariff  seems  to  be  urged  much  at  this  ses- 
sion, and  that  a  permanent  national  debt  is  now  needed,  if  at  all,  more 
to  promote  the  various  Quixotic  schemes  of  the  new  administration, 
than  to  supply  any  permanent  deficit,  or  even  temporary  debt,  of  the 
past  administration. 

Events  have  shown,  directly  in  the  teeth  of  the  gentleman's  asser- 
tion [that  the  deficiencies  in  1837  and  since  were  not  temporary], 


STATE    OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  173 

that  they  have  all  been  so  temporary  as  to  be  met  without  having  out 
at  the  beginning  of  this  year,  unpaid,  over  about  four  and  a  half  mil- 
lions of  treasury  notes,  and  that  every  dollar  of  them  would  have  been 
extinguished,  had  Congress,  as  was  repeatedly  urged,  modified  and 
prevented  the  enormous  drawbacks  forced  from  us  since  1837,  and 
stopped  the  immense  drain  on  the  treasury  since  opened  by  new  judi- 
cial constructions  of  the  tariff. 

This  is  capable  of  demonstration,  and  yet  the  gentleman  argues  that 
I  had  not  a  right  to  consider  the  deficiency  as  temporary. 

Even  all  the  notes  issued  since  the  1st  of  January  last  would  have 
been  rendered  unnecessary,  or  been  redeemed  before  this  year  termi- 
nates, if  many  in  Congress  had  abandoned  President-making  and 
attended  a  little  more  to  the  substantial  interests  of  the  revenue ;  and 
more  than  this,  if  there  had  not  beside  been  imposed  on  the  treasury, 
during  past  years,  more  appropriations  than  it  asked,  without,  at  the 
same  time,  providing  any  new  permanent  resources  to  meet  them. 

When  your  fiscal  agent  had,  for  instance,  means  to  meet  twenty- 
three  millions  of  expenditure  and  no  more,  and  so  informed  you,  there 
were  placed  on  him  twenty-five  and  thirty  millions,  against  his 
remonstrance,  and  no  new  means  provided  to  meet  the  difference, 
except  to  throw  him  grudgingly  and  late  on  the  pittance  of  treasury 
notes  he  had  asked  for  other  purposes.  And  because  that  agent  did 
not  claim  to  be  able,  with  twenty- three  millions,  readily  to  pay  thirty, 
he  was  denounced  as  muddy-headed.  I  fear  it  will  be  necessary  to 
take  a  great  deal  of  mud  out  of  the  brains  of  those  making  such  accu- 
sations, before  they  could  accomplish  what  they  so  inconsiderately 
called  for  in  others.  But,  thanks  to  a  benignant  Providence,  the 
finances  were  carried  in  safety  through  these  and  all  other  difficulties, 
as  well  as  the  most  cruel  and  disheartening  discouragements  !  Every 
claim  authorized  by  Congress  was  paid  with  promptitude,  and  gener- 
ally in  specie  or  its  equivalent,  though  surrounded  and  baffled  by 
broken  banks  and  depreciated  paper.  During  the  whole  struggle,  the 
pecuniary  credit  of  the  General  Government,  instead  of  being  blasted 
and  bankrupt  by  mal-administration,  as  many  of  its  opponents  have 
inconsiderately  alleged,  was  kept  high,  both  at  home  and  abroad.  This, 
too,  has  been  accomplished  without  adding  a  dollar  to  the  taxes  or  the 
tariff;  but  under  a  biennial  reduction  of  the  latter  going  on  during  the 
whole  period,  and  without  adding  a  dollar  of  permanent  public  debt, 
and  leaving  abroad  only  the  small  balance  of  about  four  and  a  half 
millions  of  treasury  notes  when  the  present  year  began,  and  only 
between  five  and  six  millions  on  the  4th  of  March.  The  whole  of 
these  were  also  likely  to  have  been  prevented,  or  redeemed  this  year, 
had  the  erroneous  decisions  and  drawbacks  connected  with  the  tariff 
been  corrected  by  Congress,  or  even  had  the  United  States  Bank,  in 
January  and  since,  not  scattered  ruin  over  our  commerce  and  credit, 
and  of  course  impaired  deeply  the  revenue  from  imports. 

The  only  other  matter  bearing  on  this  topic  which  I  would  now 
15*  ' 


174  STATE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY. 

explain,  is  the  postponement,  authorized  conditionally  last  year,  of 
about  two  or  two  and  a  half  millions  of  new  appropriations.  Those, 
the  senator  from  Maine  would  argue,  have  caused  the  excessive 
expenditure  proposed  in  this  report  of  near  five  millions,  or  double  the 
whole  amount !  But,  in  point  of  fact,  as  appears  on  your  own  files, 
only  about  one  million  and  three-fourths  of  these  appropriations  were 
ever  postponed  at  all  by  the  executive ;  and  that  small  amount  only 
for  a  period  of  about  three  months,  instead  of  the  whole  year.  Indeed, 
as  the  appropriations  passed  so  late  in  the  season  as  July,  not  over  a 
quarter  of  a  million  would  probably  have  been  expended  in  1840,  had 
no  postponement  whatever  taken  place.  So  that  the  whole  of  this 
mighty  load  thus  thrown  on  1841  does  not  exceed  two  or  three  hun- 
dred thousand  dollars.  To  counterbalance  this  amount  four  times 
over,  there  were  expended,  in  1840, — from  peculiar  circumstances 
explained  in  the  annual  report, — from  one  to  two  millions  more  of  old 
appropriations  than  usual ;  and  the  balance  of  them  left  at  the  close 
of  the  year,  including  all  those  authorized  specially  to  be  postponed 
till  1841,  was  not  so  large  as  at  the  end  of  1839  by  over  two 
millions. 

So  much  for  the  gross  exaggeration,  that  the  five  million  excess 
of  expenditure  proposed  in  this  report  is  to  be  justified  by  any 
virtual  postponement  from  the  last  year  of  only  about  a  quarter  of  a 
million. 

Mr.  Woodbury  then  alluded  to  the  memorial  from  Dahlonega, 
recently  presented  by  Mr.  Clay,  of  Kentucky,  who  had  warmly 
eulogized  the  sentiments  contained  in  it,  which,  after  denouncing  the 
late  administration  for  its  extravagance  in  expending  forty  millions  per 
annum,  which  it  never  spent,  recommended  a  reduction  of  the  current 
expenses  of  the  government  to  thirteen  or  fifteen  millions.  And  how 
has  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  followed  out  its  recommendations  ? 
Instead  of  the  twenty-three  millions  of  the  last  year,  and  the  twenty 
millions  for  the  present,  to  which  the  late  administration  had  taken 
measures  to  reduce  the  expenditures,  he  had  pushed  them  up  to 
twenty-six  millions  in  the  ten  months,  —  being  at  the  rate  of  thirty 
millions  per  annum,  —  and  if  he  succeeds  in  his  recommendations  of 
a  fiscal  agent  and  the  distribution  of  the  public  lands,  the  debt,  beside, 
will  soon  reach  not  only  thirty,  but  forty  millions  per  annum.  He 
called  upon  the  friends  of  the  administration  to  carry  out  the  princi- 
ples of  reform  and  retrenchment  which  they  professed  so  loudly 
before  their  accession  to  power ;  to  show  their  sincerity  in  doing  it 
now,  and  not  to  put  it  off  until  to-morrow,  "  to-morrow  and  to-morrow, 
till  the  last  syllable  of  recorded  time."  Why  not  give  us  at  once  a 
little  of  the  "  vigorous  reduction"  which  the  senator  taunts  me  with 
having  recommended,  as  most  assuredly  I  did,  with  earnestness,  and 
in  almost  all  forms,  as  well  as  at  all  times ;  and  had  the  good  fortune 
to  practise  what  I  preached. 

It  is  not  agreeable  so  often  to  speak  of  my  own  official  conduct;  but 


STATE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  175 

the  manner  of  the  attack,  and  public  considerations,  independent  of  any 
personal  feeling,  demand  and  justify  it. 

Next,  the  senator  had  endeavored  to  reconcile  the  discrepancies 
between  the  treasury  report  and  the  President's  message ;  but  most 
unsuccessfully.  Mr.  W.  then  showed  that  many  of  the  assumptions 
as  regards  different  dates  were  unfounded,  and  that  in  nearly  every 
instance  the  senator  had  extricated  the  authors  of  these  documents  out 
of  one  difficulty  by  involving  them  in  another. 

But  not  a  case  existed  where,  by  the  explanations  proposed,  the 
sums  would  foot  alike  in  the  report  or  message,  nor  where  the  Presi- 
dent's items,  when  added  up,  corresponded  with  the  erroneous  aggre- 
gates taken,  as  he  would  seem  to  say,  expressly  "  from  the  report  of 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury."  New  footings  are,  to  be  sure, 
reached  in  some  cases.  But  those  new  ones  differ,  and  are  contradic- 
tory, as  well  as  the  old  ones.  Not  an  instance  can  be  found  where 
the  President  proposes  to  refer  to  a  date  different  from  the  Secretary, 
except  one ;  and  in  that  case,  if  making  all  the  allowance  desired  for 
the  difference  in  the  two  items  connected  with  it,  the  discrepancy  still 
remains  unreconciled. 

Beside  that,  by  pursuing  this  course,  two  new  contradictions  become 
apparent,  in  that  single  statement,  in  the  face  of  the  documents.  Nor 
has  the  astute  vindicator  of  the  Secretary  even  attempted  to  explain 
why  the  omissions  are  made  in  the  aggregate  expenses  of  the  ten 
months,  and  also  of  the  whole  year,  of  some  items  included  in  the 
three  months'  expenses.  Those  three  months  are  a  part  of  the  other 
ten  and  twelve.  Why,  then,  should  not  the  expenses  of  the  whole 
include  the  expenses  of  a  part  of  the  whole  ? 

With  due  respect  to  the  philosophy  and  logic  of  the  senator  and  the 
Secretary,  the  whole  ought  to  embrace  all  the  parts,  —  at  least,  such 
was  the  doctrine  when  I  was  a  schoolboy.  It  is  a  little  remarkable, 
too,  that  in  suggestions  made  by  the  senator  with  a  view  to  reconcile, 
but  in  vain,  errors  already  discovered,  he  should  open  the  door  to  the 
detection  of  more.  Thus,  beside  what  has  been  noticed  in  table  D, 
annexed  to  the  report,  there  is  almost  half  a  million  said  to  be 
received  from  the  United  States  Bank,  "  from  the  first  of  January 
to  the  M  of  March,  1841."  But  in  the  body  of  the  report  (p.  5) 
the  Secretary  says  this  sum  was  received  by  the  public  agent  last 
October. 

Again :  if  the  explanation  attempted  of  this  contradiction  should  be, 
that,  in  the  first  instance  he  speaks  of,  its  receipt  in  form  into  the 
treasury  by  covering  warrants,  between  the  1st  of  January  and  3d  of 
March,  then  there  is  exposed  another  and  material  error,  because,  on 
the  same  page,  he  says  it  was  not  carried  on  the  books  till  "  the  4th 
of  March,  1841,"  instead  of  "  between  the  1st  of  January  and  3d  of 
March."  The  difference  of  a  day  here  is  everything,  both  politically 
and  financially,  because  one  administration  ended  on  the  third,  and  the 
other  began  on  the  fourth ;  and  if  this  sum  was  carried  on  the  books, 


176  STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY. 

as  if  paid  previously  to  the  fourth,  and  since  the  1st  of  January,  it 
would  swell,  and  has  swollen,  the  amount  of  expenditures  by  the  past 
administration  in  the  first  two  months  of  this  year,  half  a  million  of 
dollars ;  while,  on  the  contrary,  the  Secretary,  in  his  exhibit  of  the 
receipts  during  those  two  months,  in  the  body  of  his  report,  has  for- 
gotten to  give  the  past  administration  and  the  treasury  any  credit  for 
this  half-million  received  from  the  bank. 

Again :  if  this  expenditure  is  carried  on  the  books  as  having  been 
made  on  the  4th,  then  it  is,  or  ought  to  be,  included  in  his  estimate  of 
the  ten  months'  expenditure,  and  is  among  the  appropriations  he  esti- 
mates to  be  outstanding  on  the  morning  of  the  4th  of  March. 

While,  on  the  contrary,  he  has  omitted,  in  the  receipts  for  the  ten 
months,  to  credit  a  single  dollar  for  the  half-million  received  from  the 
bank.  Whichever,  then,  of  these  hypotheses  may  be  true,  there  is  a 
new  manifest  mistake  developed  of  more  than  half  a  million  of  dollars  ! 

Again :  the  senator  alludes  to  what  might  be  the  arrearages  to  be 
paid  in  the  past  three  months,  and  thus  increasing  the  expenses.  But 
I  have  before  shown  that  these  arrearages  could  not  exist  beyond  the 
ordinary  small  amount  always  occurring  in  long  unsettled  or  distant 
operations,  or  you  would  have  had  loud  complaints  here,  by  suifering 
creditors  and  contractors.  I  have  shown,  too,  that  the  amount  of  old 
appropriations,  which  alone  could  cause  any  arrearages,  were  smaller 
than  they  had  been  for  four  or  five  years  preceding ;  and  the  whole 
of  them,  if  all  due,  were  not  one-fourth  of  the  "  raw-head  and  bloody- 
bones"  which  had  been  paraded  at  the  last  session,  in  this  and  the 
other  House,  as  monstrous  arrearages  of  forty  millions. 

When  gentlemen  of  that  party,  which  modestly  claimed,  besides  the 
morals,  most  of  the  talents  and  learning  in  society,  talk  of  demands 
being  arrearages,  which  the  past  administration  was  censured  for  not 
paying,  though  they  had  never  been  sanctioned  by  Congress,  and  con- 
sisted of  any  kind  of  obsolete  claims  which  any  individuals  might 
please  to  set  up,  from  the  French  spoliations  of  near  half  a  century 
old,  to  the  latest  loss  of  some  starved  horse  in  Florida,  the  case  is  one 
beyond  the  reach  of  argument.  If  the  absurdity  of  the  pretence  is  not 
sufficient  on  its  face  to  make  the  community  scout  it,  many  of  them 
must  have  eaten  of  the  insane  root. 

I  can  inform  them,  further,  that  if  arrearages  can  justly  be  trumped 
up  in  this  way  as  the  foundation  for  political  accusation  against  the 
executive  departments  for  not  paying  them,  when  Congress  had  made 
no  appropriations  to  recognize  or  discharge  them, —  and  hence  when 
the  heads  of  those  departments  would  have  been  impeached  if  daring 
to  pay  them, —  it  would  be  as  easy  to  swell  such  arrearages  to 
$400,000,000  as  to  $40,000,000.  For  doubtless  more  than  twice 
that  large  amount  of  claims  of  all  kinds  has  been  made  on  Congress 
and  the  departments  since  1789,  which  have  not  been  paid,  nor  yet 
authorized  to  be  paid.  So  shallow  a  course  of  complaint  is  too  puerile 
for  further  notice. 


STATE   OF  THE   NATIONAL  TREASURY.  177 

Mr.  W.  then  alluded  to  the  assertion  that  the  bonds  for  duties  on 
goods  destroyed  by  fire  in  New  York,  which  had  been  postponed,  in 
1836,  to  the  amount,  as  that  senator  supposed,  of  four  or  five  millions, 
were  an  appropriate  charge  against  the  late  administration.  But  he 
[Mr.  Evans]  will  probably  find  that  the  amount  of  the  fire-bonds,  as 
they  are  called,  and  which  were  in  fact  postponed,  did  not  equal  one- 
fourth  of  that  sum.  He  is,  I  think,  confounding  those  with  the  four 
to  five  millions  postponed  in  1837,  under  the  suspension  of  specie 
payments,  and  which  were,  in  fact,  both  postponed  and  paid  under  the 
past  administration,  and  without  creating  any  pretence  of  a  charge 
against  it  on  that  account.  On  the  contrary,  the  fire-bonds,  though 
due  before  1837,  and  postponed  in  part  (whatever  their  amount)  so 
as  to  fall  due  since  1837,  have,  in  scarcely  one  instance,  been  paid  to 
this  day ;  but,  under  a  subsequent  act  of  Congress,  passed  in  1838, 
have  been  remitted  in  large  amounts,  if  not  entirely.  Indeed,  the 
past  administration  had  received  but  little  aid  from  any  such  incidental 
sources,  though  it  had  been  exposed  constantly  to  new  and  large  drains 
by  judicial  decisions, —  to  drawbacks,  reductions,  and  appropriations, 
made  much  beyond  the  amount  of  the  annual  estimates.  It  had,  how- 
ever, obtained  some  relief  from  one  among  the  items  which  Mr.  Ewing 
had  arrayed  against  it,  as  an  excess  of  expenditure  over  receipts,  to 
the  extent  of  thirty-one  millions,  and  which  he  had  so  talked  about,  in 
connection  with  the  debt  created  by  the  past  administration,  as  to  make 
many  of  his  party,  in  the  manner  before  explained,  say  that  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury  had  characterized  these  thirty-one  millions  as  a 
debt.  But  the  honorable  senator  from  Maine  now  says  this  is  a  fan- 
tasy;  yes,  a  miserable  "  goblin  damned." 

Yet  that  administration  had  much  more  extraordinary  expenses  to 
meet  than  the  amount  of  any  extraordinary  aids  received  from  the 
collection  of  its  dues  from  banks,  or  any  other  source.  So  far  from 
having  been  blessed  with  a  time  of  peace  at  home,  as  intimated,  a  war 
has  been  carried  on  during  the  whole  four  years  of  the  administration, 
at  a  greater  expenditure  of  blood  and  treasure  than  any  frontier  war 
this  country  has  ever  been  engaged  in ;  and  tins  war  still  exists,  not- 
withstanding the  bravery  and  skill  combined  in  the  present  adminis- 
tration. The  last  administration  had  done  more,  considering  its  means, 
and  the  difficulties  it  had  to  contend  with,  than  any  that  had  preceded 
it.  With  reductions  in  the  tariff  to  the  amount  of  forty  or  fifty  mil- 
lions, with  the  convulsions  in  commerce  and  business  occasioned  by 
two  suspensions  of  the  banks  of  the  country,  it  had  yet,  in  despite  of 
these  difficulties,  maintained  the  public  credit  unimpaired. 

But  will  the  Senate  spare  me  a  moment  longer,  to  reply  to  another 
animadversion  by  the  honorable  member,  rather  more  personal  to  my- 
self? 

[Here  several  voices  said,  "Go  on,  go  on I"] 

Instead  of  vindicating  the  present  Secretary  throughout,  he  seems 


178  STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY. 

inclined  to  abandon  him,  in  many  respects,  entirely ;  and,  I  suppose, 
as  a  sort  of  set-off,  then  assails  me. 

I  regret  this,  as  I  never  begin  reflections  of  this  character,  but  will 
most  assuredly  repel  them,  come  whence  they  may,  whenever  their 
importance  and  the  time  and  occasion  justify  it. 

It  seems  that  I  committed  a  heinous  sin  in  writing  and  urging  on 
receivers  too  often  a  careful  discharge  of  their  duties.  He  probably 
thinks  that  the  more  modern  military  style  of  the  present  administra- 
tion should  have  been  adopted ;  and  whether  sufficient  cause  existed  or 
not,  I  should  have  said  to  the  President,  at  once,  "  Off  with  their  heads/' 

Let  me  caution  that  gentleman  against  too  suddenly  introducing  into 
our  civil  system  of  equal  rights  and  privileges  either  military,  drum- 
head, court-martial  codes,  or  precedents  from  the  worst  eras  of  Euro- 
pean despotism.  These  recent,  reckless,  proscriptive,  and  almost 
universal  removals  for  mere  opinion's  sake,  can  hardly  be  sanctioned 
by  any  good  precedent ;  nor,  when  applied  to  officers  like  receivers  and 
collectors,  connected  with  the  collection  and  safe-keeping  of  the  public 
money,  will  they  be  very  likely  to  aid  in  replenishing  your  treasury. 

If  every  officer,  too,  like  a  receiver,  is  to  be  removed  for  every 
mistake  in  his  returns,  or  every  failure  of  the  mail  to  bring  them  at 
the  day  due,  or  for  every  accident  preventing  a  deposite  at  the  hour 
required,  and  is  not  to  be  first  written  to,  as  was  done  by  me,  for 
explanation,  you  may  be  assured  that  the  treasury  department  and  the 
President  will  always  have  full  employment  in  merely  removing  and 
appointing  to  office,  without  engaging  in  other  official  duties.  And  if 
a  single  mistake  or  error  of  that  kind  is  to  be  considered  a  good  cause 
for  immediate  dismissal  from  office,  both  the  President  and  Secretary 
might  do  well,  under  the  mistakes  and  errors  recently  committed  in 
their  public  communications,  to  consider  by  how  frail  a  tenure  they 
hold  their  own  high  stations. 

Why,  sir,  not  a  single  mail  can  reach  this  capital  of  the  Union,  from 
our  two  to  three  millions  of  square  miles  in  territory,  from  its  immense 
northern  lakes,  its  distant  Rocky  Mountains,  its  broad  gulfs,  and 
extended  seaboard,  without  some  irregularities  or  informalities  in  the 
returns  of  officers,  connected  either  with  the  military  or  some  of  the 
numerous  branches  of  the  civil  service.  None  without  some  defects  in 
and  from  themselves,  and  none  without  some  derived  from  others. 
None  without  some  accident  of  sickness  in  the  officers  or  their  families, 
or  without  some  disaster  by  flood  or  field,  to  cause  unexpected  error 
or  delay.  The  correspondence  with  receivers,  to  which  he  refers,  was 
written  under  such  circumstances  and  in  such  cases.  Similar  corre- 
spondence has  always  taken  place  under  my  predecessors ;  volumes, 
like  that  which  has  been  published,  could  be  collected  from  other 
periods,  and  in  all  the  departments. 

Some  cases  of  this  kind,  under  Mr.  Gallatin,  and  especially  one  with 
a  collecting  officer  at  New  Orleans,  have  been  published,  years  ago,  in 
your  own  edition  of  certain  public  documents.     The  officer  afterwards 


STATE    OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  179 

turned  out  to  be  a  large  defaulter,  and,  like  some  more  modern  ones, 
fled  to  Europe. 

But  did  Mr.  Gallatin,  or  Mr.  Madison  (for  it  is  the  President,  and 
not  the  Secretary,  that  can  remove  or  appoint),  at  once  remove  the 
officer,  before  the  defalcation  was  admitted  or  ascertained  on  our  books? 
No.  In  every  instance,  also,  in  all  the  recent  correspondence  to  which 
the  gentleman  refers,  not  a  case  can  be  found  of  a  warrant  on  a 
receiver  being  protested  or  unpaid,  unless  explained  by  some  accident, 
and  the  receiver  was  not  forthwith  suspended  or  removed.  So  no  case 
exists  of  a  pecuniary  default  or  embezzlement,  clearly  ascertained  on 
our  own  books,  when  the  offending  receiver  was  not  dismissed,  if,  in 
the  mean  time,  he  had  not  resigned. 

But,  for  party  purposes,  the  incessant  labor  of  the  department, 
night  and  day,  at  all  seasons,  and  under  all  discouragements,  to  spur 
officers  up  to  punctuality,  to  increase  their  care  in  having  formal 
returns,  to  make  them  faithful  and  prompt  in  their  deposites,  and  thus 
saving  many  thousands,  if  not  millions,  to  the  treasury,  —  this  now, 
by  honorable  opponents,  is  again  to  be  revived,  and  distorted  into  a 
partisan  theme  for  taunts,  for  scoff,  for  scorn.  One  sentence  is, 
probably,  as  heretofore,  to  be  quoted,  and  another  explaining  it  to  be 
suppressed.  One  letter  read,  and  the  reply,  clearing  up  any  doubt. 
not  read.  Different  letters  to  the  same  person,  in  different  years,  and 
under  new  and  different  circumstances,  are  to  be  represented  as  all 
belonging  to  one  transaction. 

But  enough  of  this  for  the  present.  History  will,  when  set  right, 
settle  this  question  also,  with  many  others  of  a  like  character.  This 
much,  at  all  events,  is  certain :  that  not  so  much  money  in  amount  has 
been  lost  by  all  the  receivers  combined,  who  are  mentioned  in  that 
correspondence,  as  has  been  lost,  in  a  short  period  since,  in  each  of  a 
dozen  cases  of  officers  in  banks,  appointed  and  regulated  by  our  oppo- 
nents, and  belonging  to  their  own  ranks.  No,  sir ;  not  so  much  by 
three  times  told. 

A  few  words  more,  on  two  or  three  other  of  the  senator's  allusions, 
unless  the  Senate  is  too  much  fatigued  for  me  to  proceed. 

[Many  said,  u  No,  no,  —  go  on  ! "] 

Well,  sir,  the  senator  from  Maine  observed,  that  the  celebrated 
specie  circular  operated  so  as  to  draw  money  from  New  York  city, 
and  should,  therefore,  on  my  reasoning  as  to  the  new  project  for  a 
Fiscal  Bank  in  this  report,  and  the  supplement  to  it,  have  been  con- 
demned. 

I  am  happy  to  agree  with  him  that,  in  times  like  these,  or  in  any 
ordinary  times,  that  particular  effect  of  the  specie  circular  would  have 
been  injurious.  But  the  measure  had  other  influences,  which  were 
highly  salutary,  and,  in  the  peculiarly  extraordinary  crisis  then  exist- 
ing, its  tendency  to  withdraw  some  specie  from  New  York  city  served 
to  check  and  terminate  a  greater  evil,  —  the  immense  overtrading 
there,  and  the  immense  paper  bubble  speculations  that  then  inundated, 


^        OFTHE     V 
UNIIUCDpitw 


180  STATE  OF  THE  NATIONAL  TREASURY. 

like  a  second  deluge,  the  whole  country.  These  it  immediately  began 
to  thwart,  embarrass  and  destroy.  Fortunate  would  it  have  been  for 
millions  of  people,  could  some  measure  have  effected  the  same  result  a 
year  earlier.  Thus  did  this  incident  of  it  prove,  in  that  emergency, 
highly  beneficial.  Yet  the  senator  censured  it,  while  working  that 
salutary  correction,  because  it  removed  some  specie  from  the  great 
centre  of  commerce,  while  he  vindicates  this  report,  and  its  supple- 
mental project  of  a  bank,  calculated  to  withdraw  specie  from  the  same 
place,  even  in  ordinary  times,  and  as  the  ordinary  settled  policy  of  the 
Secretary's  financial  schemes.  The  Secretary  seeks,  also,  thus  to 
remove  the  specie  by  his  new  banking  machine,  to  be  located  here,  as 
its  centre,  and  abuses  the  sub-treasury  for  concentrating  specie  in 
New  York,  when  Mr.  Gallatin,  in  the  pamphlet  before  mentioned, 
declares,  like  the  authorities  cited  the  other  day,  that  the  places  for 
such  a  bank  are  " the  great  centres  of  commerce"  (p.  93),  and  its 
board  of  control  must  not  be,  as  in  this  city,  in  the  centre,  I  admit, 
merely  of  court  etiquette  and  fashion,  but  must  "sit  in  a  great 
COMMERCIAL  city:'     (p.  95.) 

We  have  heard  much,  also,  in  this  report  and  the  message,  and 
elsewhere,  of  the  benefits  the  new  "Fiscal  Bank"  would  produce  on 
exchanges.  But  the  difference  in  what  is  called  exchanges  is  often  a 
difference  between  the  value  of  gold  and  silver  and  the  value  of  mere 
irredeemable  paper ;  and  thus,  what  are  called  exchanges  are  swollen 
to  ten  or  fifteen  per  cent.,  when  real  exchanges,  between  specie  in  one 
place  and  specie  in  another,  are  not  one  per  cent.  It  is  truly  said,  by 
the  distinguished  financier  before  cited,  that  a  national  bank  cannot 
remedy  this,  unless  it  can  drive  out  the  local  paper ;  that,  in  respect 
to  mere  exchanges,  it  can  only  buy  and  sell,  like  others,  at  market 
prices,  settled  by  other  great  laws  of  trade,  pervading  the  civilized 
world,  and  which  this  bank  can  neither  control  nor  alter.  Nor  can  it, 
with  only  ten  or  fifteen  millions  of  currency,  expel  one  hundred  and 
twenty  millions  of  local  bank  paper.  The  idea  that  it  can,  is  quite  as 
crude  as  the  other,  about  its  great  influence  over  exchanges.  Mr. 
Gallatin  is  as  explicit  on  this  point  as  on  the  other ;  though  I  will  not 
now  detain  the  Senate  by  reading  quotations  as  to  both.  But  it  is 
intimated  that  the  revulsions  of  1837,  as  well  as  the  excesses  of  1836, 
were  attributable  to  the  past  administration.  Without  stopping,  on 
this  occasion,  to  argue  that  point,  I  will  refer  merely  to  the  admission 
of  the  same  political  opponent  [Mr.  Gallatin],  whose  high  standing  in 
these  matters  has  been  more  than  once  recognized  in  a  very  flattering 
manner  on  this  floor. 

Mr.  G.  says  (page  32)  : 

"  The  unforeseen,  unexampled  accumulation  of  the  public  revenue  was  one  of  the 
principal  proximate  causes  of  the  disasters  that  followed.     It  cannot  be  ascribed 

EITHER   TO   THE  PRESIDENT  OR  TO  ANT  BRANCH  OP  GOVERNMENT  ;   and  its  effects  might 

have  been  the  same,  whether  the  public  deposites  were  in  the  State  banks  or  had 
been  left  in  the  National  Bank,  organized  and  governed  as  that  was." 


STATE   OF   THE   NATIONAL   TREASURY.  181 

The  same  idea  had,  on  more  than  one  occasion,  been  set  forth  in 
documents  emanating  from  the  treasury  department.  But  then  its 
correctness  was  stoutly  denied  by  the  party  now  in  power,  both  in  and 
out  of  Congress.  I  rejoice  that  the  scales  have  already  fallen  from 
the  eyes  of  some  of  the  most  able  among  them. 

Again,  in  the  face  of  no  little  upbraiding,  I  remonstrated,  in  1836, 
against  the  too  rapid  collection  and  distribution  of  the  surplus ;  and  in 
another  debate,  at  this  session,  took  the  liberty  to  explain  in  detail  the 
injurious  operation  of  that  dangerous  provision,  which,  rather  than 
any  mal-administration  by  the  treasury  department,  hurried  on  the 
catastrophe  which  followed.  Without  going  into  a  similar  explanation 
again  at  this  time,  let  me  merely  give  a  few  remarks  of  Mr.  Gallatin 
on  that  feature  of  the  bill : 

"  Its  process  was  much  too  prompt."  —  "  The  legislature  was  not,  and  could  not 
be  aware,  how  slow  and  gradual  the  diminution  of  discounts  must  be,  in  order  that 
universal  distress  may  not  ensue." 

There  is  much  more  of  a  similar  character  in  this  very  able  pam- 
phlet, which  I  will  not  detain  you  by  reading,  though  bearing  directly 
on  the  criminations  which,  in  this  debate  and  in  the  documents  before 
us,  have  been  cast  on  the  past  administration,  and  particularly  on  its 
fiscal  operations.  It  has  further  been  specified,  as  an  instance  of  the 
hostility  of  the  treasury  department  at  that  period  to  the  State  banks, 
that,  if  its  measures  did  not  cause  their  suspension,  the  head  of  the 
department  resisted  and  retarded  the  resumption  of  specie  payments. 

But  the  reverse  was  the  truth, — by  the  great  forbearance  used  in 
not  suing  the  banks,  and  by  circulars  of  advice  to  begin  resuming  in 
every  city,  county,  and  State,  the  first  moment  practicable,  as  the 
ablest  bankers  now  admit  was  right,  rather  than  to  wait  for  all  to 
unite.  Indeed,  I  did  more,  as  well  as  promised  more,  in  favor  of 
resumption.  This  may  be  seen  by  my  correspondence,  in  the  appen- 
dix of  this  pamphlet,  with  such  really  sound  financiers  as  Nathan 
Appleton,  of  Boston,  and  George  Newbold,  of  New  York. 

In  fine,  to  pass  over  any  further  discussion  of  such  points  at  this 
moment,  it  should  be  noticed,  in  concluding,  that  most  of  the  modes 
of  relief  proposed  by  the  Secretary  and  President,  and  which  I  before 
endeavored  to  prove  to  be  ill-judged  and  fallacious,  nobody  has  yet 
undertaken,  on  this  floor,  to  vindicate.  Even  the  senator  from  Maine 
slides  over  the  whole  in  detail,  doubtless  because  too  novel,  if  not 
doubtful,  in  character,  to  merit  his  vindication,  except  by  loose  and 
very  general  commendation.  One  of  them,  the  proposed  distribution 
of  the  proceeds  of  the  lands  to  the  States,  as  well  as  another,  the  mar- 
vellous relief  to  be  anticipated  by  the  indebted  States  from  a  new 
national  bank,  Mr.  Gallatin  justly  considers,  like  the  politicians  on 
this  side  of  the  Senate  chamber,  as  delusive,  and  by  no  means  proper 
to  be  relied  on. 

Though  he  was  in  some  degree  friendly  to  such  a  bank,  when  of 
16 


TEA   AND    COFFEE  —  NECESSARIES   OF  LIFE. 

small  capital,  carefully  modified  in  other  respects,  and  under  severe 
restrictions, — less  friendly,  however,  than  in  former  days, — he  still 
regards  such  an  institution  as  very  "liable  to  be  abused;"  and  he 
pronounces  the  last  bank  to  have  been,  in  every  respect,  "  A  PUBLIC 
NUISANCE."  He  adds  that  "  the  mismanagement  and  gross  neglect 
which  could,  in  a  few  years,  devour  two-thirds  of  a  capital  of  thirty- 
five  millions,  are  incomprehensible,  and  have  no  parallel  in  the  history 
of  banks."  Yet  the  reestablishment  of  a  similar  bank  seems  to  be  a 
favorite  scheme  with  many  gentlemen  on  the  other  side,  and  with  it 
the  adoption,  also,  of  the  other  measures  of  relief,  as  they  are  mis- 
called, by  giving  away  nine  millions, — one  specimen  of  their  economy, 
— and  three  millions  more,  as  another  specimen ;  by  raising  the  taxes, 
through  a  tariff,  near  eight  millions  higher,  as  another  mode  of  reliev- 
ing the  community ;  and,  as  another,  by  loading  us  and  our  posterity 
with  a  new  national,  permanent  debt,  in  time  of  peace  with  foreign 
nations,  to  the  enormous  amount  of  twenty-eight  or  thirty  millions 
more.  Such  financiering,  if  carried  into  effect,  would  make  us  the 
laughing-stock  of  Europe. 

These  are  the  Secretary's  reform  measures,  and  which,  by  tins 
motion,  we  propose  to  disseminate  widely,  if  not  commend.  The  sen- 
ator from  Maine  had  concluded  his  remarks  by  expressing  his  hopes 
that  the  measures  of  "  relief "  proposed  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treas- 
ury would  be  adopted.  Independently  of  constitutional  considerations, 
and  those  of  expediency,  he  (Mr.  W.)  hoped  so  too ;  for  he  did  not, 
and  could  not,  wish  any  administration  a  greater  curse  than  to  have 
hung  round  its  neck  the  measures  proposed  by  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury. 


TEA  AND   COFFEE  —  NECESSARIES   OF  LIFE* 


It  is  of  no  consequence  to  me  who  made  the  motion  to  have  these 
articles  considered  free.  If  that  desirable  object  can  only  be  obtained, 
it  is  all  I  wish.  The  senator  from  North  Carolina  can  now  present 
his  reasons  in  favor  of  exempting  them  from  duty,  if  convenient  to 
him.  But,  if  he  declines,  I  would  detain  the  Senate  a  few  minutes, 
and  only  a  few,  in  stating  what  has  influenced  me  to  make  the  motion. 

In  the  first  place,  these  articles  were  not  taxed  either  to  benefit  the 

*  A  speech  delivered  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  Aug.  31,  1841,  on  motion 
to  include  tea  and  coffee  in  the  list  of  free  articles. 


TEA  AND    COFFEE  —  NECESSARIES   OF  LIFE.  183 

products  of  agricultural  or  manufacturing  labor.  Neither  came  in 
competition  with  them.  We  were,  therefore,  wholly  relieved  from 
any  considerations  connected  with  the  principle  of  protection.  On  the 
contrary,  the  duty  on  tea  and  coffee  would  operate  unfavorably  to 
those  engaged  in  manufactures,  as  well  as  those  in  agriculture,  because 
both  of  those  classes,  in  common  with  all  others  in  the  community, 
were  consumers  of  these  great  articles,  and  of  course  burdened  by 
taxation  upon  them. 

All,  then,  possessed  a  common  interest  in  making  them  free ;  and 
all,  he  trusted,  would  unite  in  making  them  free,  unless  the  revenue 
proposed  to  be  derived  from  them  was  needed  indispensably  to  fulfil 
the  public  engagements,  or  to  meet  those  current  expenses  which  the 
respectability,  usefulness,  and  honor,  of  the  General  Government 
demanded. 

Whatever  those  really  did  demand,  he  was  willing,  for  one,  to  vote, 
even  to  the  taxing  of  necessaries.  But  he  was  not  willing  to  do  this, 
if  due  care  and  economy  would  prevent  the  occasion  for  it,  or  if  the 
retaining  our  other  rich  resources  in  the  proceeds  of  the  public  lands, 
instead  of  lavishly  giving  them  away,  would  prevent  it. 

This,  then,  is  the  gist  of  the  inquiry  under  the  present  motion : 

Is  this  tax  on  tea  and  coffee, —  the  luxuries  of  the  young,  if  you 
please,  but  the  comforts  of  the  middle-aged,  the  solace  of  the  more 
advanced  in  life,  and  the  necessaries  of  the  old, — is  this  tax  indis- 
pensable? 

Whether  these  articles,  under  all  views  and  at  all  times,  were  or 
were  not  real  necessaries,  did  not  make  so  great  a  difference  in  this 
respect,  as  whether,  under  the  limit  of  twenty  per  cent,  in  the  compro- 
mise, we  could  or  could  not  get  revenue  enough  for  an  economical 
administration,  without  imposing  some  duty  on  tea  or  coffee.  Because, 
if  we  could  not,  then  we  must  tax  even  necessaries,  or  resort  to  more 
loans.  I  admit,  however,  that  these  subjects  of  almost  universal  use 
were  once  regarded  as  luxuries,  and  so  taxed.  But  in  the  progress  of 
wealth,  comfort,  and  intelligence,  among  the  middling  and  poorer 
classes,  which  had  elevated  them  so  much  higher  in  the  social  circle, 
tea  and  coffee  had  become,  to  almost  all,  a  species  of  necessaries ;  and 
they  required  exemption  from  duty,  when  practicable,  almost  as  much 
as  salt  or  molasses,  if  looking  to  their  wide-spread  consumption,  and 
their  conduciveness  to  temperance  and  general  happiness.  Yet,  under 
pressing  circumstances,  we  had  been  obliged  at  times  to  tax  the  great- 
est necessaries.  But  were  we  now,  by  any  such  circumstances,  com- 
pelled to  renew  a  tax  on  tea  and  coffee  ? 

The  senator  from  Kentucky  had  been  so  obliging  as  to  refer  to  a 
report  made  by  me  at  the  last  session,  in  which,  under  certain  events, 
it  was  suggested  that  tea  and  coffee  would  be  among  those  articles 
which  we  might  be  obliged  to  tax.  Yes,  sir,  I  then  thought,  and  do 
now,  that  these  articles,  though  once  luxuries,  were  not  to  be  now 
strictly  treated  as  such,  and  still  were  to  be  taxed,  if  it  was  necessary 


184  TEA   AND    COFFEE  —  NECESSARIES   OF   LIFE. 

to  raise  so  much  under  a  tariff  as  to  embrace  articles  of  that  descrip- 
tion, in  order  to  obtain  the  indispensable  amount. 

I  am  happy  to  find  that  my  views  as  to  the  character  of  these  arti- 
cles concurred  with  those  of  the  honorable  senator,  expressed  as  long 
ago  as  1832.  He  then  remarked,  in  much  better  language  than  I 
could  select  for  myself,  that 

"  If  the  universality  of  the  use  of  objects  of  consumption  determines  their  classifi- 
cation, coffee,  tea,  and  spices,  in  the  present  condition  of  civilized  society,  may  be 
considered  necessaries.  Even  if  they  are  luxuries,  why  should  not  the  poor,  by 
cheapening  their  prices,  if  that  can  be  effected,  be  allowed  to  use  them?" 

Hence,  sir,  the  articles  of  tea  and  coffee — only  now  quasi  luxuries 
to  any,  and  substantially,  or  practically,  among  the  comforts,  if  not 
necessaries,  of  all  classes  —  are  not  to  be  taxed,  unless  indispensable 
to  meet  our  imperative  engagements.  But,  on  the  contrary,  if  it 
appear  that  we  are  not  able  to  meet  those  engagements,  except  by 
taxing  necessaries  as  well  as  luxuries,  then  you  must  march  up  to  the 
urgency  of  the  occasion,  and  tax  them,  as  you  already  have  woollens, 
sugar,  and  iron.  I  thought  formerly,  as  I  do  now,  and  hope  always 
to  think,  that  if  you  will  not  reduce  your  expenditures  as  low  as 
eighteen  or  twenty  millions,  and  do  not  expect  larger  importations 
than  those  of  1838,  it  will  not  be  possible  to  make  the  ends  of  the 
year  meet,  without  going  beyond  twenty  per  cent,  duty  on  some  arti- 
cles, or  raising  the  duty  on  others  now  free,  including  tea  and  coffee ; 
and  that  the  only  question  would  then  be  between  the  preservation  of 
the  public  faith  and  a  moderate  tax  on  tea  or  coffee.  Between  those 
two  considerations,  when  forced  on  us,  I  did  not  then,  nor  could  I 
now,  hesitate. 

But  I  then  stated  expressly,  as  I  now  do,  that  our  expenditures 
ought  not,  in  my  opinion,  to  exceed  about  eighteen  millions  a  year,  in 
1842.  I  had  expressed  a  similar  opinion,  in  the  annual  report  on  the 
finances,  in  the  December  previous.  And  I  still  think  that  they  could 
safely  and  prudently  be  reduced  to  even  less  than  eighteen,  in  ordinary 
times,  and  am  ready  at  any  moment  to  designate  the  items  and  amounts 
of  reduction  under  each  which  appear  to  me  feasible.  I  then  thought, 
also,  and  then  said,  that  probably  the  imports  would  be  larger  in  1842, 
and  afterwards,  than  they  had  been  in  1838.  But  it  was  necessary 
to  take  some  year  as  an  illustration  of  the  computation,  and  therefore 
a  new  one  (1838)  was  selected,  as  1839  had  been  unusually  high.  It 
was,  however,  manifest  then,  as  it  is  now,  that  if  our  expenses  should 
not  exceed  eighteen  millions  yearly,  and  the  imports  prove  to  be  much 
larger  than  in  1838,  no  duty  whatever  on  tea  and  coffee  would  proba- 
bly be  necessary. 

By  the  much  larger  amount  of  imports,  as  computed  by  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury,  for  1842,  no  duty  on  them  will  be  required  in 
order  to  defray  eighteen  or  even  twenty  millions  of  expenditure. 
Hence,  in  accordance  with  the  principles  I  have  always  entertained  on 


TEA  AND   COFFEE  —  NECESSARIES  OF  LIFE.  185 

this  question,  and  in  accordance  with  sound  views  of  political  economy, 
this  motion  to  make  tea  and  coffee  free  ought  to  prevail. 

The  only  remaining  inquiry,  on  this  occasion,  is  one  of  fact, —  that 
is,  whether  the  Secretary's  estimate  as  to  the  revenue,  or  mine  as  to 
the  proper  amount  of  expenditure,  are  either  of  them  erroneous.  It 
becomes  a  question,  on  sound  economical  principles,  whether  we  could 
obtain  enough  for  all  our  reasonable  wants,  without  the  duties  on  tea 
and  coffee,  or  not.  This  must  depend  upon  how  much  we  ought  to 
expend  yearly  under  the  new  administration,  so  radical  in  its  profes- 
sions ;  and  how  much  we  are  likely  to  receive  yearly,  without  a  tax  on 
these  articles,  under  its  high  expectations  as  to  a  revival  of  prosperity. 
I  shall,  then,  for  reasons  stated  on  several  former  occasions,  suppose, 
until  the  contrary  is  shown,  that  the  expenditures  in  1842  ought  to 
be  not  over  eighteen  millions,  and  that  the  large  imports  estimated  at 
this  session  in  the  treasury  department,  and  in  the  other  House,  may 
be  probable.  Then  we  can  assess  twenty  per  cent,  on  one  hundred 
and  twenty-five  millions  of  dutiable  imports,  and  then  the  net  revenue 
would  be  over  twenty  millions.  To  that,  in  the  first  half  of  next  year, 
there  will  be  added  over  two  millions,  before  the  last  reduction  takes 
effect,  on  the  1st  of  July ;  and,  after  that,  over  a  million  more,  for  the 
augmentation  then  made  by  the  home  valuation.  The  senator  from 
Kentucky  will  probably  estimate  the  addition  by  the  home  valuation 
at  even  a  larger  amount. 

The  whole  revenue  from  customs  would  thus  be  over  twenty-three 
millions ;  —  add  to  this  only  three  millions  more  for  the  lands,  and  you 
have  a  net  revenue  of  more  than  twenty-six  millions,  to  meet  eighteen 
millions  of  expenditure.  I  add  the  lands,  because  the  bill  giving  them 
away  has  not  yet  become  a  law,  and  ought  not  to.  But  if  it  does 
become  a  law,  and  is  not  repealed  before  a  distribution  is  made,  there 
will  be  still  twenty-three  millions  of  revenue,  to  meet  only  what  ought 
to  be  eighteen  millions  of  expenditure.  That  will  leave  an  excess  of 
five  millions  of  revenue ;  so  that  two  millions  on  tea  and  coffee,  as  well 
as  one  million  on  salt  and  molasses,  can  be  dispensed  with,  and  still 
two  millions  extra  be  left  to  cover  contingencies  and  fluctuations, 
whether  in  receipts  or  expenditures,  or  in  paying  the  debt.  The  duty 
on  tea  and  coffee  can  thus  safely  and  prudently  be  omitted.  It  amounts, 
at  twenty  per  cent,  on  an  average  import,  to  only  about  two  millions, 
instead  of  three,  as  supposed  by  the  Secretary  and  others.  The 
amount  brought  in  during  1840,  of  near  twenty  million  pounds  of 
tea,  was,  from  difficulties  between  China  and  England,  nearly  double 
the  average  quantity  consumed  here.  Hence,  say  ten  millions,  at 
twenty-nine  cents  per  pound,  with  the  ninety-five  million  pounds  of 
coffee,  at  nine  cents  per  pound,  and  they  would  be  together  in  value 
only  about  $11,450,000.  On  this  a  duty  of  twenty  per  cent,  would 
yield,  in  the  gross,  only  $2,290,000,  and  of  net  revenue  not  much 
above  two  millions. 

Place  these,  then,  among  the  free  articles,  and  there  would  still  be 
16* 


186  TEA  AND    COFFEE  —  NECESSAKIES   OF  LIFE. 

over  twenty-one  millions  of  revenue,  from  customs  alone,  to  defray 
eighteen  millions  of  expenditure.  I,  therefore,  have  proposed  to  go 
still  further,  and,  by  another  amendment,  reduce  the  duties  on  salt 
and  coffee,  next  year,  one  half,  and,  in  1845,  the  other  half,  consti- 
tuting together  about  a  million. 

If  they  both  were  free,  as  well  as  coffee  and  tea,  the  revenue  on 
the  imports  above  stated  would  be  likely  to  exceed  the  maximum 
deemed  proper  for  expenditure,  as  before  computed;  and  hence,  I 
trust  that  not  only  this  motion  will  prevail,  but  insure  success,  also, 
to  the  other. 

I  am  unwilling,  on  this  occasion,  and  at  this  late  period  of  the  ses- 
sion, to  detain  the  Senate  a  moment  by  collateral  and  incidental  matters. 
I  will  not  add  a  word  not  necessary  to  present  these  few  direct  and 
plain  reasons  in  behalf  of  tea  and  coffee.  If  any  gentleman  is  anxious 
to  exonerate  these  articles  from  impost,  and  the  people  at  large  from 
being  burdened  by  a  heavy  tax  on  them,  let  him  not  be  deterred  by 
any  apprehension  that  our  expenditures  may,  by  accidental  and 
untoward  circumstances,  be  swollen  for  a  year  or  two  as  high  as 
twenty-three  millions.  Even  in  that  event,  he  can  vote  for  this  motion 
with  perfect  safety,  if  the  proceeds  of  the  lands  are  not  finally  given 
away. 

Thus,  should  that  law  not  take  effect,  or  be  repealed  at  the  next 
session,  there  will,  without  a  tax  on  tea  and  coffee,  be  twenty-three  to 
twenty-four  millions  of  revenue  from  both  customs  and  lands  ;  being 
quite  enough  to  meet  the  whole  expenditures,  though  increased  by  the 
interest  on  the  new  debt,  and  other  unfavorable  causes,  to  twenty- three 
millions. 

The  first  issue,  then,  is,  will  you  retain  a  duty  on  tea  and  coffee, 
when  it  will  not  be  needed  at  all,  if  you  only  keep  down  the  expenses 
to  eighteen  or  twenty  millions  ?  Or,  in  other  words,  are  you  deter- 
mined to  raise  the  expenses  extravagantly,  at  the  sacrifice  of  tea  and 
coffee  ? 

The  next  issue  is  as  follows  :  If  you  allow  the  expenses,  whether 
extravagantly  or  necessarily,  to  be  swollen  to  twenty-three  millions, 
will  you  not  keep  the  public  lands,  and  pay  the  expenses  with  their 
proceeds,  rather  than  tax  articles  of  such  wide-spread  consumption, 
among  the  masses  of  society,  as  tea  and  coffee?  Or,  in  different 
words,  will  you,  merely  for  the  purpose  of  giving  away  the  rich  pro- 
ceeds of  the  public  lands,  without  any  really  gainful  result  to  the 
General  Government,  the  States,  or  the  people  at  large, — as  shown  by 
me  on  another  occasion, —  will  you  heap  additional  burdens  on  those 
who  desire  to  continue  their  temperate  and  humble  enjoyment  of  the 
use  of  tea  and  coffee  1 

These,  sir,  are  the  true  questions.  In  the  best  view,  it  is  a  contest 
between  increased  expenditure,  with  tea  and  coffee  taxed,  on  the  one 
hand,  and  economy,  with  tea  and  coffee  free,  on  the  other  hand.  In 
the  worst  view,  it  is  a  war  between  giving  away  idly,  if  not  mischiev- 


ON   THE   LAND   DISTRIBUTION   BILL.  187 

ously,  the  whole  public  lands,  beside  burdening  heavily  with  taxation 
tea  and  coffee,  on  the  one  side,  and,  on  the  other,  not  giving  the  lands 
away,  and  not  taxing  at  all  articles  of  such  universal  use. 
It  is  for  the  Senate  to  decide  between  these  alternatives. 


ON  THE  LAND   DISTRIBUTION  BILL: 


I  consider  this  bill  as  proposing  the  greatest  innovation,  in  the 
administration  of  the  concerns  of  the  General  Government,  which  has 
occurred  in  our  history.  Nor  is  it  one  of  those  measures  which  form 
an  epoch  for  good  or  glory,  like  the  birth  of  Christianity,  or  some 
memorable  revolution  in  favor  of  popular  rights  ;  but  it  will  form,  it 
is  feared,  an  era  of  evil  and  disaster,  like  the  deluge,  or  the  cholera, — 
like  "war,  pestilence,  or  famine." 

Why,  sir,  what  is  the  manifest  character,  the  very  front  of  the 
case,  whether  we  look  to  it  in  a  fiscal  or  political  view?  In  the 
former  view,  it  is  no  less  than  a  donation,  by  the  General  Government, 
of  a  thousand  millions  of  acres  of  land.  It  is  giving  away,  outright, 
a  territory  equal  in  extent  to  more  than  half  the  smaller  kingdoms  of 
Europe  added  together.  It  is  parting  with  a  productive  fund,  or  a 
capital  for  financial  resources,  richer  than  that  of  the  most  gorgeous  of 
Oriental  despotisms.  We  throw  away,  like  the  base  Judean,  a  pearl 
worth  all  his  tribe.  We  do  this,  too,  when  represented  to  be  embar- 
rassed in  our  finances,  when  our  expenditures  are  rapidly  increasing, 
when  twelve  millions  of  new  debt  have  been  authorized  and  ten  or 
fifteen  more  are  in  progress,  and  when  a  large  augmentation  of  taxes  on 
some  of  the  greatest  necessaries  of  life  has  passed  one  House,  and  is  wait- 
ing on  your  table  the  sanction  of  the  other.  Above  all  these  consider- 
ations, we  do  this  when  no  surplus  exists,  or  is  likely  to  exist,  and 
when  the  loss  of  the  yearly  revenue  of  the  lands  is  not  only  to  be  sus- 
tained by  the  General  Government,  but  a  new  resort  become  necessary, 
for  an  equal  if  not  larger  amount,  to  be  exacted  back  in  taxes  from 
the  States  and  the  people. 

In  a  political  view,  the  measure  is  still  worse,  if  possible.  It  is 
unequal  and  unjust  to  particular  States,  to  particular  sections  of  the 

*  A  speech  delivered  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  August  25th,  1841,  on  the 
final  passage  of  the  bill  for  Distribution  of  Public  Lands. 


188  ON  THE  LAND   DISTRIBUTION   BILL. 

country,   to  particular  classes ;    and  it  is  in  this,  and  other  ways, 
demoralizing  to  society,  and  dangerous  to  the  Union  itself. 

In  these  opinions  I  may  err.  But  my  conviction  of  their  correct- 
ness is  so  strong,  that  I  do  not  hesitate  to  throw  the  facts  and  reasons 
on  which  they  are  founded  before  political  opponents,  and  to  ask  even 
of  them  reconsideration  and  deliberation.  No  person  is  more  ready  to 
do  justice  than  myself  to  others  from  whom  I  am  divided  by  mere  dif- 
ferences in  opinion ;  and  whatever  of  party  discipline,  of  hasty  State 
instructions,  or  imperfect  examination,  may  have  operated  to  carry  this 
bill  thus  far,  I  know  that  there  are  candor,  patriotism,  and  conscience 
enough, —  yes,  sir,  independence  and  high  honor  enough, —  on  the 
other  side,  yet  to  arrest  so  alarming  an  innovation  as  this,  if  I  can  only 
bring  the  real  facts  and  true  principles  of  the  case  to  bear  fairly  on 
their  judgments.  I  will  try,  sir.  I  am  bound  to  try,  by  the  instruc- 
tions of  my  State,  as  well  as  a  sense  of  duty.  And  had  the  screw,  or 
a  contest  for  physical  exhaustion,  forced  me  to  rise  at  an  untimely 
hour,  I  should  have  spoken,  sir,  at  the  risk  of  perishing  at  my  post. 

Let  me  first  dispose  of  several  topics  which  may  be  regarded  as  inci- 
dental, or  collateral,  to  the  main  questions.  Some  of  those  have,  on 
former  occasions,  and  with  some  friends  of  the  bill,  assumed  an  import- 
ance to  which  they  are  hardly  entitled,  and  must  therefore  be  swept 
away. 

Thus,  the  Chairman  of  the  Land  Committee  (Mr.  Smith,  of 
Indiana),  who  has  industriously  watched  over  this  measure,  urged  its 
adoption  because  the  public  lands  were  a  fluctuating  source  of  revenue. 
What,  sir !  are  we  to  give  away  a  valuable  estate,  if  its  income  is  irreg- 
ular ']  Would  an  individual  throw  away  a  farm,  or  a  fishery,  because 
this  year  he  realized  one  thousand  dollars  from  it,  and  the  next  but 
eight  hundred  dollars,  and  the  next  twelve  hundred  ?  Absurd !  I 
have  heard  the  same  argument  pressed  on  other  occasions.  Yet  it  is 
not  only  unreasonable  in  itself,  but,  unhappily  for  its  authors,  it  is  not 
founded  in  fact.  Here  are  the  official  returns  in  my  hands,  from  1817 
to  1840  inclusive,  of  the  revenue  from  customs  and  from  lands,  sepa- 
rately. Take  out  the  three  years  of  1835,  J6,  and  '7,  when  the 
prices  of  everything  were  raised  so  artificially  high  by  bank  expan- 
sions, and  when  the  prices  of  the  public  lands  were  not  by  Congress 
raised  with  the  rest,  and  consequently  surplus  capital,  in  many  places, 
rushed  into  the  purchase  of  lands, —  how  then  stands  the  comparison? 
Why,  sir,  the  average  revenue  from  customs  was  about  twenty  millions 
yearly,  and  that  from  lands  about  two  and  a  half  millions ;  and  the 
departures  from  these  averages  were  much  oftener  and  much  greater 
in  the  former  than  in  the  latter.  On  the  mode  of  reasoning,  then, 
which  has  been  pursued  on  this  point,  we  should  give  away  all  the 
receipts  derived  from  customs,  rather  than  those  from  lands.  But 
enough  of  this. 

The  next  collateral  topic  is,  that  the  lands  ought  not  to  be  regarded 
as  a  source  of  revenue.     Why  should  they  not  be,  as  much  as  any  other 


OX   THE   LAND    DISTRIBUTION   BILL.  189 

productive  property  ?  Why  not  be  used  for  profit,  especially  when, 
without  them,  we  must  resort  to  higher  taxation  'I  If  gentlemen  regard 
them  as  owned  by  the  General  Government  only  in  pledge,  mortgage, 
or  trust,  till  certain  objects  are  accomplished,  and  then  to  be  returned 
to  the  States,  I  will  soon  show  that  no  such  trust  either  exists,  or,  if 
existing,  has  been  accomplished  in  all  its  objects,  or  is  attempted  to  be 
recognized  and  carried  out  by  the  provisions  of  this  bill.  But  now, 
passing  by  these,  if  the  lands  are  not  to  be  kept  for  revenue,  why  use 
them  as  a  source  of  expense,  rather  than  revenue  ?  Why  pay  over 
the  proceeds  of  them  by  this  bill,  after  some  small  deductions,  and 
not  pass  over,  nor  deduct,  all  the  charges  still  yearly  connected 
with  them  ?  These  consist  of  the  Indian  expenditures,  equalling,  for 
many  years  past,  more  than  all  the  present  revenue  from  all  the  pub- 
lic lands.  Here  they  are,  sir,  in  the  tabular  statements  before  me, 
going  back  a  quarter  of  a  century.  In  one  year  three  millions  and  a 
fraction,  in  another  nearly  three  and  a  half,  and  in  another  exceeding 
four  millions. 

Why,  also,  should  we  not  deduct,  or  pass  over  to  the  States,  with 
the  income  of  the  land,  the  burdens,  in  procuring  and  defending  it, 
connected  with  the  Florida  war,  and  Revolutionary  pensions,  each 
enough  to  absorb  the  whole  ?  No,  sir  !  Instead  of  distributing  the 
proceeds  of  the  lands  by  this  bill,  because  we  should  not  make  them  a 
source  of  revenue,  we  do  it  with  the  certain  and  inevitable  result  of 
making  them  a  source  of  expense.  We  give  away  lavishly  the  income 
from  them,  but  reserve  almost  all  the  heavy  expenditures  incurred 
annually  on  account  of  them  to  be  paid  by  heavy  taxation.  I  told  the 
chairman  on  a  former  occasion,  and  I  repeat  it  now,  that  if  he  will 
place  the  whole  accounts  of  the  receipts  and  expenditures  connected 
with  the  public  lands  into  the  hands  of  a  master  in  chancery,  whether 
they  relate  to  the  present  or  past,  not  a  dollar  of  net  revenue  or  net 
proceeds  will  be  found  to  exist,  to  be  distributed.  The  bill  itself,  then, 
is  delusive,  in  pretending  to  pay  over  a  source  of  revenue,  or  net 
proceeds  from  land  alone. 

One  more  of  these  collateral  topics,  and  I  have  done  with  that  class 
of  arguments  in  favor  of  so  objectionable  a  measure. 

It  is  gravely  stated  that  the  lands  are  a  corrupt  and  corrupting 
species  of  property,  and  ought,  therefore,  to  be  disposed  of  at  once. 
Indeed  !  Why  more  corrupt  than  the  revenue  from  customs  ?  Either 
can  be  applied  to  purposes  of  personal  or  political  aggrandizement,  by 
unscrupulous  politicians.  But  neither,  in  and  of  themselves,  need  be 
used  to  promote  such  profligacy.  And  from  whom,  sir,  does  this 
objection  come  ?  From  the  very  persons  who,  by  this  very  bill,  still 
retain,  in  one  of  its  sections,  the  absolute  right  in  the  General  Govern- 
ment, notwithstanding  the  distribution,  to  dispose  of  any  part  or  all  of 
the  lands  themselves,  in  any  manner  and  to  any  object,  corrupting  or 
otherwise,  which  Congress  may  deem  proper.  The  bill,  then,  destroys 
the  argument.     In  fine,  sir,  if  the  lands  have,  in  special  cases,  been 


190  ON   THE   LAND   DISTRIBUTION   BILL. 

heretofore  applied  to  dishonest  purposes,  the  bill  retains  a  full  power 
to  make  the  same  disposition  of  them  hereafter. 

With  these  hasty  remarks  on  incidental  or  collateral  points,  I  pass 
to  the  great  paramount  and  direct  principles  involved  in  this  alarming 
measure.  First,  as  to  some  of  its  constitutional  bearings.  If  we 
analyze  its  character  with  care,  and  look  through  forms  and  names  to 
substance,  I  feel  a  strong  conviction  that  several  of  its  principles,  and 
especially  its  tendencies,  will  be  found  directly  at  war  with  the  spirit 
of  the  constitution.  More  than  this,  sir ;  the  measure,  as  a  whole,  it 
is  feared,  will,  on  examination,  appear  to  be  exceedingly  impolitic, 
at  this  juncture  very  ill-timed,  and  entirely  delusive  as  to  any  ben- 
eficial results  anticipated  from  it,  either  to  the  General  Government, 
the  States,  or  the  people  at  large. 

What,  then,  is  its  real  character?  I  pronounce  this  distribution, 
sir,  to  be  a  gift  to  the  several  States  —  a  naked  gift.  And  if,  on  a 
thorough  scrutiny,  it  turn  out  to  be  so,  whether  consisting  of  property 
or  money,  I  shall  endeavor  to  show  it  to  be  unconstitutional. 

Less  will  be  said,  on  some  of  the  points  connected  with  this  branch 
of  the  inquiry,  than  if  I  had  not  been  relieved  by  previous  able  dis- 
cussions of  them,  on  this  and  previous  occasions.  Let  no  one  attempt 
to  escape  the  conclusion  that  it  is  a  gift  by  any  suggestion,  that,  under 
the  circumstances  of  the  case,  and  the  provisions  of  this  bill,  it  ought 
to  be  considered  in  the  light  of  the  payment  of  a  debt  due  to  the 
States. 

A  debt !  Why,  sir  ?  What  State  holds  the  bond  or  note  of  the 
General  Government  for  this  debt  ?  None.  Only  seven  of  the  twen- 
ty-six States  ever  made  any  cession  of  any  supposed  title  to  any  of 
the  public  lands,  whose  proceeds  are  now  illogically  argued  to  be  a 
debt  due  to  each  of  the  twenty-six.  Nineteen  of  them  never  pre- 
tended any  right  to  any  of  them,  as  separate  States.  How,  then,  do 
we  owe  any  debt  ?  How  arises  any  semblance  of  debt  to  those  nine- 
teen ?  Even  the  other  seven  merely  quit-claimed,  or  released  to  us, 
what  most  of  them  had  little  or  no  legal  right  to.  They  did  it  to 
quiet  disturbances,  settle  conflicting  pretensions,  promote  the  general 
welfare  of  the  whole  United  States,  and  never  dreamed  of  creating 
thereby  a  debt  for  the  value  of  the  lands.  If  so,  what  was  the 
amount  of  the  debt  ?  And  why  has  it  not  been  before  demanded  ? 
On  the  contrary,  the  title  of  those  seven  States  separately,  sir,  rested, 
to  use  the  words  of  an  old  provincial  governor,  on  about  as  strong  a 
record  as  "the  scratch  of  a  bear's  paw."  The  lands  were  mostly 
waste  or  crown  lands ;  and,  in  the  struggle  of  the  Revolution,  they 
were  bought  and  paid  for,  by  the  whole  thirteen  States  then  in  being, 
by  their  blood.  Their  indomitable  courage  and  constancy  conquered 
them.  Their  sacrifices,  sufferings,  and  blood,  balanced  the  accounts. 
But,  beyond  all  this,  what  pretence  of  debt  is  due  to  those  seven  States 
for  the  immense  domain  of  Louisiana  and  Florida,  which  they  never 
claimed  —  never  conveyed?     That  domain  the  General  Government 


ON  THE  LAND   DISTRIBUTION  BILL.  191 

bought  of  France  and  Spain,  and  paid  for  out  of  the  public  treasury. 
Yet,  sir,  by  this  bill,  you  undertake  to  pay  those  States,  as  well  as  the 
rest,  a  larger  amount,  on  account  of  the  lands  thus  obtained  from  for- 
eigners, than  all  which  were  ever  surrendered  to  us  by  all  the  seven 
States  together.     But  it  cannot  be  done  as  a  debt. 

Again  :  if  a  debt,  why  do  we  not  deduct  from  it,  in  this  bill,  at  least 
the  acknowledged  debts  due  to  us  from  those  and  other  States  1 

The  Revolutionary  debt  due  to  us  from  several  of  the  old  States 
exceeds  four  millions  of  dollars ;  and  the  recent  deposite  with  the 
States  in  1837,  acknowledged  by  their  solemn  laws  as  well  as  ours  to 
be  a  debt  due  to  us,  exceeds  twenty-eight  millions.  Yet  this  bill,  if 
paying  to  them  an  old  Revolutionary  or  more  recent  debt,  should  cer- 
tainly deduct  what  is  due  to  us.  Once  more,  why  does  not  the  Pres- 
ident recommend  its  payment  in  his  message,  as  a  debt,  if  it  be  one ; 
and  why  did  not  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  so  anxious  to  swell  our 
national  debt,  discover  and  urge  this  as  a  part  of  it,  instead  of  placing 
the  distribution,  as  does  the  President,  on  grounds  entirely  different  ? 

But  more.  If  this  be  a  debt,  what  right  have  we,  as  provided  in 
this  bill,  to  stop  the  payment  on  the  occurrence  of  a  war?  What  right 
have  we,  as  in  the  bill,  to  stop  payment  of  it,  and  dispose  of  the  whole 
lands  in  any  different  manner  which  Congress  may  at  any  moment 
happen  to  prefer  ?  What  right  have  we,  also,  as  in  this  bill,  to  stop 
the  payment  whenever  Congress  pleases  to  increase  the  minimum 
price  of  the  public  lands  per  acre?  What  right  to  suspend  its  payment 
when  the  tariff  is  increased  above  twenty  per  cent.,  as  is  now  provided 
in  the  amended  bill  ? 

All  these  are  gross  usurpations,  —  violations  of  compacts,  and  dis- 
graceful immorality  on  the  part  of  the  Senate,  —  if  we  regard  these 
proceeds  to  belong  to  the  States,  as  a  debt  due,  and  not  to  be  a  mere 
gift. 

Let  us  pass  from  this  untenable  and  contradictory  hypothesis  to 
another,  somewhat  more  plausible,  which  is,  that  the  distribution  is 
the  execution  of  a  (rust  in  favor  of  the  States  in  these  lands,  rather 
than  a  gift. 

Some  have  called  it  a  resulting  trust,  after  the  payment  of  the  Rev- 
olutionary debt.  They  have  been  driven  to  this  from  the  fact,  that, 
in  several  of  the  cessions,  no  trust  whatever  is  expressed.  Here  are 
the  whole  of  the  grants  proving  that  fact.  But,  if  it  be  a  resulting 
trust,  let  me  ask  you,  sir,  as  a  lawyer,  and  once  a  chancellor,  as  well 
as  judge,  if  a  trust  can  result  of  anything  except  what  is  contained  in 
the  deed,  and  to  any  person  except  the  grantor  in  each  deed  ?  There 
would,  then,  result  nothing,  to  any  State,  of  the  lands  in  Florida  or 
Louisiana,  as  none  of  them  are  in  any  of  the  deeds.  Nor  would  a 
trust  result  to  any  State,  except  of  that  particular  land  contained  in 
its  particular  deed.  Hence,  for  instance,  instead  of  giving,  as  in  this 
bill,  to  New  York  a  vast  distributive  share  in  the  whole  of  the  public 
lands,  she  should  have  nothing  in  those  purchased  from  foreign  powers, 


192  ON   THE   LAND    DISTRIBUTION   BILL. 

nor  in  those  conveyed  by  other  States,  but  simply  all  which  remains 
of  what  was  covered  by  her  own  deed.  Under  this  view,  also,  as  only 
seven  States  released  any  title  whatever,  nothing  whatever  could 
revert  to  any  of  the  other  nineteen,  by  way  of  resulting  trust.  Much 
more  could  be  presented  under  this  head,  to  show  how  utterly  ground- 
less, in  every  view,  is  this  pretence,  that  the  distribution  is  not  a  gift, 
because  it  is  a  resulting  trust.  But  I  forbear  to  weary  the  Senate 
with  it. 

The  only  other  argument  to  prove  it  not  to  be  a  naked  gift  is  an 
idea  formerly  much  dwelt  on,  but,  on  full  examination,  found  to  be 
equally  unfounded,  that  the  distribution  is  the  execution  of  an  express 
trust  contained  in  the  deeds  of  cession. 

Pray  tell  me,  sir,  if  there  was  in  them  an  express  trust,  to  be  ful- 
filled at  a  certain  time,  and  in  a  certain  event,  to  the  States,  when 
was  that  time,  or  what  that  event  ?  Gentlemen  have  argued  that  it 
was  after  the  payment  of  the  Revolutionary  debt,  or  of  all  the  national 
debt.  Yet  here  are  the  words,  in  every  deed,  in  the  document  in  my 
hand,  and  not  a  syllable  of  that  kind  appears  in  one  of  them.  But,  if 
it  did,  neither  of  those  events  has  yet  occurred.  Some  of  the  Revolu- 
tionary debt  yet  remains ;  and  large  charges  for  Revolutionary  claims, 
including  pensions,  as  well  as  for  paying  annuities  to  Indians,  and 
discharging  other  expenses  yearly,  in  the  extinguishment  of  Indian 
titles,  and  the  defence  of  that  very  soil  from  Indian  incursions.  So, 
some  of  the  other  portions  of  the  national  debt  remain  ;  and  we  have 
added  to  them,  at  this  very  session,  twelve  millions,  and  have  in  pro- 
gress, in  the  ridiculous  make-shift  for  a  bank,  the  new-fangled  Exchange 
Fiscal  Corporation,  an  authority  for  ten  or  fifteen  millions  more. 

The  express  trust  is,  then,  as  untenable  as  the  resulting  one ;  not 
only  for  these  reasons,  but  that  it  cannot  extend,  by  any  pretence 
whatever,  to  any  portion  of  Florida  or  Louisiana.  Besides  all  this, 
however,  the  bill  itself  puts  a  veto  on  the  whole  assumption  of  its  being 
the  execution  of  a  trust.  If  money  is  to  be  given  to  the  States  on 
that  account  and  on  their  theory,  —  of  its  beginning  when  most  of  the 
debt  was  paid, — then  the  distribution  should  go  back  to  1835,  and 
embrace  all  the  net  proceeds  since.  Then,  too,  it  should  in  future 
reach  only  the  NET  proceeds,  instead  of  taking,  as  it  does,  almost  the 
whole  gross  proceeds.  Then,  as  before  mentioned,  what  right  has 
Congress  to  reserve  a  power  to  stop  the  execution  of  this  trust,  and 
otherwise  dispose  of  all  or  any  of  the  lands,  whenever  it  pleases  ?  Then, 
how  dare  the  chairman  insert  a  provision  in  the  bill,  as  he  has,  sus- 
pending the  trust,  in  the  occurrence  of  war  ?  Where  is  the  right  to 
do  it  ?  How  dare  he,  also,  in  that  view,  to  annul  the  whole  trust,  as 
he  does,  if  Congress  at  any  time  chooses  merely  to  raise  the  minimum 
price  of  the  public  lands  ?  How  can  we,  ourselves,  also  be  justified  in 
the  amendment  made  to  suspend  its  whole  operation,  at  any  moment 
when  it  shall  become  necessary  to  raise  the  tariff  higher  than  twenty 
per  cent.  ?     Who  gave  us  such  a  power  over  this  property,  if  it  be  an 


ON   THE   LAND   DISTRIBUTION   BILL.  193 

express  trust  ?  Where  is  it  conferred  1 — by  whom  ?  What  right  have 
we  to  retain  the  lead  mines  and  salt  springs,  to  lease  for  revenue  ? 
What  right  to  the  sixty  or  seventy  millions  of  acres  exchanged  with 
the  Indians  in  the  far  west  ?  No,  sir  ;  the  whole  bill  is  inconsistent 
throughout  with  any  such  idea.  The  distribution  is  treated  in  all 
respects  as  a  naked  gift,  and,  as  such,  is  to  be  made  and  regulated,  if 
at  all,  by  the  constitution,  and  the  provisions  of  it  applicable  to  the 
disposal  of  all  the  property  and  money  of  the  General  Government. 

Otherwise,  it  would  also  be  impossible  to  exercise,  as  we  do,  an 
unlimited  discretion  in  several  other  provisions.  Thus,  we  give  an 
additional  per  centage  to  some  States,  and  withhold  it  from  others. 
We  give  thousands  of  acres  besides  that,  and  an  equal  share  to  some 
States,  and  none  to  others.  We  make  it  begin  at  an  arbitrary  date, 
and  we  suspend  it  at  an  arbitrary  date  or  event.  We  act  as  if  uncon- 
trolled :  and  the  public  must  look  to  our  acts  on  record  for  their  true 
character,  rather  than  our  words  in  debate.  There  is  no  manly,  hon- 
orable escape  from  these  conclusions.  We  cannot  hold  up  our  heads 
as  statesmen,  and  conduct  in  this  way,  except  with  our  own ;  —  never 
with  a  debt  or  a  trust  belonging  to  others.  We  can  honestly  act  in 
this  way  only  with  property  or  money  which  belongs  absolutely  to  the 
General  Government,  for  common,  public,  joint,  confederated  purposes, 
and  which  we  may  possess  the  right  to  give  away  in  this  manner,  con- 
sistently with  the  constitution.  The  chairman  has  felt  the  force  of 
this,  and  has  at  last  attempted  a  vindication  of  his  bill,  on  the  ground 
that  it  gives  away  the  lands  rather  than  money,  and  that  Congress  can 
rightfully  give  away  the  property  of  the  General  Government  when 
and  where  it  could  not  give  away  its  money.  This  is  the  last  refuge 
for  defence  :  and  if  this  position  prove  unsound,  as  I  believe  it  to  be 
totally,  it  will  be  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  reconcile  this  distribu- 
tion either  with  the  letter  or  spirit  of  the  constitution. 

Where,  then,  let  me  inquire,  can  any  clause  in  that  sacred  instru- 
ment be  found,  which,  in  the  slightest  degree,  justifies  such  a  conclu- 
sion !■  We  are  referred  to  the  authority  granted  in  section  third,  article 
fourth,  "to  dispose  of  and  make  all  needful  rules  and  regulations 
respecting  the  territory  or  other  property  belonging  to  the  United 
States." 

But  did  anybody,  till  within  a  year  past,  ever  dream  that  this  con- 
ferred a  power  to  give  away  the  whole  public  property,  of  every  kind, 
of  the  General  Government  ?  What,  sir  !  a  power  to  arrange  and  reg- 
ulate, or  even  to  sell,  meant  to  be  one  to  give  away?  Was  such  a 
doctrine  ever  broached  before,  in  the  whole  half-century  which  has  pre- 
ceded us  under  the  constitution,  and  which  has  been  filled  with  con- 
flicts of  the  most  astute  and  able  minds  to  discover  grounds  for  broad 
constructions  ?  To  dispose  of  property  or  appropriate  money,  not  as 
douceurs  or  mere  gifts,  but  objects  connected  with  the  "general  wel- 
fare," has  been  considered  very  latitudinarian.  But  the  argument 
which  allows  you  to  give  away  the  whole  of  our  princely  domain, 
17 


194  ON   THE   LAND   DISTRIBUTION   BILL. 

extending  from  the  Atlantic  to  the  Rocky  Mountains,  and  even  to  the 
Pacific  Ocean, — to  bestow  our  whole  navy,  our  numerous  fortifications, 
this  very  hall  where  we  deliberate, — and  these  to  any  and  every  object, 
however  local,  narrow,  or  sectional,  and  to  be  applied,  if  any  State 
chooses,  to  the  erection  of  mere  jails,  a  bounty  on  wolf-scalps,  or  the 
most  paltry  matter  of  domestic  police, — outrages  all  the  restrictions  in 
the  constitution,  and  declares  open  war  with  the  Virginia  platform  of 
'98.  In  fine,  it  goes  as  much  beyond  the  doctrine  of  the  "  general 
welfare,"  as  that  goes  beyond  the  limitation  of  various  specific  objects 
enumerated  in  the  constitution. 

I  feel  mortified,  sir,  that  a  son  of  Virginia,  the  commonwealth 
that  has  heretofore  fought  so  many  victorious  battles  in  favor  of  strict 
constructions,  should  for  a  moment  have  seemed  to  yield  any  kind 
of  assent  to  such  a  worse  than  Hamiltonian  heresy.  He,  too,  a  repub- 
lican of  the  school  of  '98  (Mr.  Archer).  Why,  sir,  the  whole  dis- 
covery is  in  the  teeth  of  the  construction  by  Jefferson  and  Madison, 
cotemporaneous  as  well  as  that  continued  for  half  a  century.  It  is 
death  to  every  sacred  principle, — death  to  public  safety,  public  virtue, 
public  liberty.  It  is,  in  truth,  founded  on  an  entire  mistake  as  to  the 
obvious  meaning  of  the  word  dispose,  and  as  to  the  object  of  that 
clause  in  the  constitution.  It  was  manifestly  introduced,  not  to  appro- 
priate or  apply  our  property,  but  merely  to  regulate  its  sale  and 
management. 

The  word  dispose  usually  means  "to  arrange,"  or  "to  bargain," 
or  "to  alienate;"  as,  "the  man  has  disposed  of  his  house,"  &c. 
Richardson,  Johnson,  and  Webster,  are  full  of  such  definitions.  What, 
also,  is  "  a  sound  and  disposing  mind,"  in  a  testator,  but  a  mind  capa- 
ble cf  making  a  judicious  bargain  ?  Any  different  construction  vio- 
lates the  ordinary  signification  of  the  words,  as  well  as  common  sense. 
Why  should  a  power  be  conferred  on  Congress  to  give  away  all  our 
property,  but  not  our  money'?  This  clause,  like  the  authority  intrusted 
to  an  agent,  by  an  individual  in  society,  to  dispose  of  his  farm,  or  of  his 
stock  of  cattle,  in  the  owner's  absence,  is  a  power  to  sell  them,  and  not 
give  them  away.  But,  being  sold,  what  shall  be  done  with  the  pro- 
ceeds depends,  in  both  cases,  on  other  and  distinct  arrangements,  pro- 
visions, or  orders.  In  this  case,  the  clause  to  dispose  of  the  lands, 
&c,  is  executed  not  by  giving  them  away,  but  by  selling  them  under 
the  laws  which  form  our  beautiful  system  of  land  sales,  that  has  been 
in  force  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century. 

Under  this  bill,  the  mode  of  disposing  of  the  lands  themsalves,  gen- 
erally, is  not  attempted  to  be  changed.  They  are  still  to  be  sold  to 
A,  B,  and  C,  at  public  auction  and  private  entry,  and  not  to  be  given 
away  to  them.  But,  after  being  sold,  like  any  other  property,  such  as 
refuse  lumber  or  timber,  condemned  vessels,  goods  forfeited,  &c,  and 
the  proceeds  paid  into  the  public  treasury,  then  this  clause  in  the  con- 
stitution as  to  their  disposal  is  executed,  exhausted.  After  that,  this 
bill  undertakes  to  give  away  the  proceeds  of  those  sales,  but  with  no 


ON   THE   LAND   DISTRIBUTION   BILL.  195 

more  right  or  authority  under  that  clause  than  under  any  other  clause 
whatever.  No,  sir  ;  such  a  course  would  subvert  the  natural  import 
of  the  plainest  language.  It  must  give  the  proceeds  away,  if  at  all 
legally  within  and  under  the  constitution,  as  it  gives  the  half-millions 
of  acres  to  nine  of  the  States,  by  virtue  of  the  clauses  which  specify 
to  what  objects  the  public  money  may  be  applied;  and  it  should 
expressly  apply  them  or  their  use,  as  is  done  with  that  half-million,  to 
national  objects.  There  is  no  other  way  legally  of  drawing  money 
from  the  treasury  which  is  once  in  it.  There  should  be  no  other. 
And  let  me  tell  my  friend  from  Virginia  (Mr,  Archer)  that  every 
dollar  of  this  distribution  —  not  like  property  granted,  but  like  money 
voted  —  will  be  entered  on  the  books  of  the  treasury  among  the  gen- 
eral revenues  of  the  government,  and  come  out  of  that  treasury  consti- 
tutionally only  by  an  appropriation ;  and  when  paid  out,  must  and 
will  be  charged  up  as  among  the  expenditures  of  the  year.  It  is,  then, 
to  be  treated  exactly  like  the  money  collected  in  taxes.  There  is  no 
power  in  the  constitution  to  treat  the  proceeds  of  property,  or  to  give 
away  the  proceeds  of  property,  differently  from  the  proceeds  of  taxa- 
tion. 

What  a  miserable,  wretched  farce  would  it  be  to  attempt  to  carry 
into  effect  the  contrary  doctrine !  Then  you  could  give  away  prop- 
erty, but  not  the  money  which  was  used  to  purchase  it.  You  could 
collect  money  in  taxes  to  buy  other  property  to  supply  the  place  of 
that  given  away :  and  this  second  purchase  might  also  be  given  away, 
but  the  money  to  buy  it  could  not  be. 

Am  I,  sir, — in  an  American  Senate,  surrounded  by  the  ambassadors 
of  twenty-six  sovereign  States,  many  of  them  ex-judges,  ex-governors, 
ex-secretaries,  and  conscript  fathers  for  age  and  dignity, —  am  I 
doomed  to  listen  to  such  deceptive  reasoning,  such  morality?  It  is 
not  possible  for  us  to  sanction  a  system  of  paltry  evasion. 

Forbidden  by  the  true  meaning  of  the  word  dispose,  forbidden  by 
the  design  of  the  whole  clause,  forbidden  by  sound  logic,  to  make  a 
gift  of  property,  where  you  cannot  make  it  of  money,  what  would  be 
the  fatal  consequences  of  such  a  practice,  and  which  tend  with  equal 
force  to  forbid  it  1 

Why,  sir,  in  this  way,  the  objects  most  sacred  to  the  framers  of 
the  constitution,  such  as  freedom  of  conscience  and  liberty  of  the  press, 
might  be  placed  in  the  most  imminent  danger,  by  giving  away  property 
to  any  or  every  purpose,  without  regard  to  constitutional  limitations. 
The  property  might  also  be  given  to  the  most  pernicious  and  demoral- 
izing purposes.  It  might  be  given  to  establish  partisan  presses,  to 
erect  churches  or  theatres,  to  furnish  shows  of  wild  beasts,  or  gladia- 
torial combats,  or  triumphal  processions,  as  in  days  of  yore,  and  the 
whole  community  become  betrayed,  corrupted,  and  prostituted,  with 
their  own  money.  But,  beyond  this,  the  public  property  could  be 
given  to  particular  favored  classes,  whether  manufacturers  and  the 
rich,  or  to  the  desperate  and  needy ;  and  thus  convert  the  government 


196  ON   THE   LAND   DISTRIBUTION   BILL. 

substantially  into  an  oppressive  monied  oligarchy,  or  a  levelling, 
ferocious  agrarianism. 

A  single  other  consideration,  in  respect  to  the  remarks  of  some 
senators  that  Congress  has  been  accustomed  to  give  away  lands  more 
liberally,  or  on  different  principles,  than  money.  But  if  this  was  so 
under  impulses  of  feeling,  or  under  the  influence  of  our  ample  resources 
in  land,  it  cannot  alter  a  constitutional  principle,  which  recognizes  no 
distinction  in  the  power  to  appropriate,  or  give  away,  either  property  or 
money. 

Again :  most  of  the  cases  supposed  to  be  mere  gifts  of  land,  whether 
to  individuals  or  States,  have  been,  in  fact,  grants  with  a  view  to  pro- 
mote legitimate  and  express  constitutional  objects.  Thus  the  donations 
for  education  in  the  new  States  have  been  asked  to  increase  the 
inducements  to  remove  there,  and  augment  the  value  and  sales  of  our 
other  lands.  So  of  the  grants  to  canals  or  roads.  So  of  the  grants 
to  the  Revolutionary  veterans,  like  Stark  and  Lafayette,  to  pay  them 
more  fully  for  their  sacrifices  and  toils.  So  of  lands  granted  for 
bounties  to  enlist,  or,  instead  of  pensions,  to  form  a  part  of  the  compen- 
sation and  reward  for  the  most  perilous  services  by  flood  and  field. 

Nor  can  there  be  any  sound  distinction,  taken  so  ingeniously  by  the 
senator  from  Virginia  (Mr.  Archer),  between  the  lands  granted  for 
common  objects  and  property,  or  money  obtained  for  general  objects. 
Why,  sir,  the  very  first  dictionary  you  open  defines  the  word  general 
to  mean  common.  (See  Todd's  Johnson.)  They  mean  the  same  pre- 
cisely in  the  preamble  of  the  constitution  and  elsewhere,  when  the 
common  defence  and  the  general  welfare  are  spoken  of  under  the 
same  view  and  restrictions.  So,  in  the  deeds  of  cession  by  Virginia, 
Georgia,  and  North  Carolina,  to  form  "a  common  fund;"  by  Massa- 
chusetts, "for  the  common  benefit;"  by  Connecticut,  "for  the  com- 
mon use  and  benefit."  They  all  mean  exactly  the  same  as  a  general 
fund,  or  for  the  general  benefit  or  general  welfare ;  and  when  the 
old  Congress  voted,  in  1780,  to  apply  them  to  the  " common  benefit," 
they  meant  the  same ;  and  all  their  successors  have  done  the  same  with 
the  proceeds  of  them  as  with  the  taxes.  What  is  the  boasted  desig- 
nation of  his  own  native  State?  It  is  the  "unterrified  common- 
wealth."  Is  she  not,  then,  in  consulting  the  common  weal  of  her 
citizens,  consulting  their  general  weal  ?  And  can  she  give  away  the 
'property  of  the  State,  more  than  its  money,  because  she  is  a  common- 
wealth?  These  points,  sir,  cannot  require  any  further  illustration. 
The  property,  as  well  as  the  money,  held  by  the  General  Government, 
is,  therefore,  held  for  the  common  or  general  purposes  for  which  that 
government  was  established.  It  is  joint  property.  It  is  for  joint,  and 
not  separate,  objects  of  the  States.  It  is  for  national  or  confederated 
ends,  and  not  for  the  local  ends  of  each  State.  It  is,  in  fine,  a 
species  of  joint  stock  company,  or  partnership,  for  both  pecuniary  and 
political  specified  objects. 

The  property,  any  more  than  the  money,  of  such  a  partnership, 


ON   THE   LAND   DISTRIBUTION   BILL.  197 

cannot  rightfully  be  applied  to  other  than  the  joint  and  enumerated 
objects.  What  lawyer,  or  even  village  referee,  would  dare  to  hold 
that  either  of  these  could  be  given  away  ?  or  even  used  for  the  sepa- 
rate debts  and  purposes  of  one  of  the  firm,  while  the  firm  continued, 
and  was  in  debt,  and  needed  the  income  of  all  its  property  ?  The 
division  of  the  joint  or  common  property  would  likewise  be  a  dissolu- 
tion of  the  compact,  if  not  otherwise  provided  for,  and  tend,  like  this, 
to  entire  disunion,  and  the  ruin  of  the  partnership  concerns.  Under 
these  views,  and  our  well-known  embarrassed  condition  as  a  common 
Confederacy  at  this  crisis,  the  common  property  or  common  funds 
cannot  be  given  to  its  separate  members  to  be  used  separately,  and  for 
local  objects,  as  is  proposed  by  this  bill,  without,  in  my  opinion,  an 
open,  clear,  flagrant  violation  of  the  whole  object  of  the  cessions,  and 
of  all  the  constitutional  regulations  as  to  use  and  disposition  of  the 
public  resources. 

I  may  be  too  strong  in  this  conclusion  from  these  premises  alone. 
But  whether  so  or  not,  there  are  still  other  material  considerations, 
which  greatly  tend  to  strengthen  it. 

Thus,  the  original  idea  of  a  distribution,  whether  of  money  or  lands, 
was  to  appropriate  them  to  some  one  of  the  great  national  objects  sup- 
posed by  its  friends  to  be  confided  to  the  General  Government,  and  not 
otherwise. 

The  only  difference,  very  material  from  usual  appropriations  to 
those  objects,  was,  to  let  the  States  expend  these  appropriations  for 
common  and  joint  objects,  rather  than  for  the  General  Government  to 
do  it.  But,  by  this  bill,  we  neither  designate  the  objects  of  expenditure, 
so  as  to  make  them,  in  anybody's  view,  national,  nor  retain  the  con- 
trol over  the  expenditure,  so  as  to  have  it  applied  only  to  purposes 
contemplated  and  authorized  by  the  constitution.  This  is  a  portentous 
departure  from  principle,  as  well  as  precedent,  and  tends  to  break  down 
every  constitutional  barrier  in  use,  either  for  property  or  money. 

Go  back,  sir,  fifteen  years,  and  listen  to  some  of  the  first  whispers 
of  distribution,  and  mark  the  dangerous  departure  since.  Then  it  was 
a  distribution  proposed  merely  of  a  surplus  in  the  treasury,  and  not 
particularly  of  the  public  lands.  Then  it  was  proposed  to  be  made  of 
an  excess  beyond  our  current  wants,  and  not  of  what  we  forthwith 
needed ;  not,  when  we  were  embarrassed,  resorting  to  loans,  increasing 
our  expenditures,  and  obliged  to  raise,  by  additional  taxes,  the  whole, 
and  even  more  than  all  we  distribute.  It  was  to  be,  also,  of  only  an 
accidental  excess ;  because,  if  a  permanent  one,  it  was  conceded,  on  all 
sides,  to  be  proper  to  prevent  it  by  a  reduction  of  the  tariff,  and  to 
avoid,  by  all  means,  a  constant  distribution.  It  was  then,  likewise,  to 
be  expressly  required,  in  the  act  of  appropriation,  to  be  applied  exclu- 
sively to  objects  deemed  national  by  its  friends,  and  therefore  constitu- 
tional. 

When,  in  1831  or  1832,  a  project  originated  for  giving  away  the 
public  lands,  or  their  proceeds,  it  had  become  probable  that  the  duties 
17* 


198  ON   THE   LAND   DISTRIBUTION   EILL. 

would  soon  be  reduced,  after  the  payment  of  the  public  debt.  Hence, 
it  was  perceived  by  the  manufacturers,  that,  unless  the  lands  were 
given  away,  the  duties  would  be  too  much  reduced,  and  the  protection 
too  much  lessened,  for  their  interests.  The  diminution  would  be  three 
millions  more  than  if  the  proceeds  were  given  away,  or  appropriated  to 
some  great  and  exclusive  objects.  But  did  anybody  then  propose  to 
keep  duties  high,  much  less  to  raise  duties  higher,  for  the  sole  purpose 
of  distribution  1  Or  did  they  dare  then,  at  first,  to  attempt  to  distribute 
the  lands,  in  order  to  help  the  manufacturers,  or  for  any  other  pur- 
pose, whether  of  political  ambition  or  personal  aggrandizement,  without 
restricting  the  use  of  them,  in  the  appropriation  itself,  to  what  they 
considered  national,  and  therefore  what  had  the  appearance  of  being 
constitutional  objects  ?  No,  sir ;  the  bill  of  the  senator  from  Kentucky 
limited  expressly  the  use  of  the  proceeds  of  the  lands  to  "  education, 
internal  improvement,  colonization  or  reimbursement  of  any  existing 
debt  contracted  for  internal  improvements."  (See  journal  of  the 
Senate,  July  2d,  1832.) 

The  speech  of  that  senator,  June  20th,  1832,  urged  the  passage  of 
his  bill  because  those  objects  were  "  all  national  in  their  nature,"  and 
therefore  constitutional.     (Mr.  W.  read  extracts  from  the  speech.) 

Go  a  step  further,  and  look  at  the  same  learned  senator's  speech, 
delivered  January  11,  in  that  same  year.  I  rejoice  to  find  that  he 
there,  also,  supports  my  present  position ;  and,  indeed,  goes  so  far  as  to 
say  virtually,  not  only  that  duties  should  not  be  raised  to  be  distributed, 
but  that  a  measure  in  the  form  of  the  very  bill  now  before  us  would 
be  both  unwise  and  unconstitutional.  In  order  to  avoid  any  miscon- 
ception of  his  meaning,  I  will  give  his  own  words. 

"  In  making  this  inquiry  [said  Mr.  Clay],  the  first  question  which  presents  itself 
is,  whether  it  is  expedient  to  preserve  the  existing  duties,  in  order  to  accumulate  a 
surplus  in  the  treasury,  for  the  purpose  of  subsequent  distribution  among  the  several 
States.  I  think  not.  If  the  collection  for  the  purpose  of  such  a  surplus  is  to  be  made 
from  the  pockets  of  one  portion  of  the  people  to  be  ultimately  returned  to  the  same 
pockets,  the  process  would  be  attended  with  the  certain  loss  arising  from  the  charges 
of  collection,  and  with  the  loss,  also,  of  interest  while  the  money  is  performing  the 
necessary  circuit;  and  it  would  therefore  be  unwise.  If  it  is  to  be  collected  from  one 
portion  of  the  people  and  given  to  another,  it  would  be  unjust.  If  it  is  to  be  given  to 
the  States  in  their  corporate  capacity,  to  be  used  by  them  in  their  public  expenditure, 
I  know  of  no  principle  in  the  constitution  which  authorizes  the  Federal  Government 
to  become  such  a  collector  for  the  States,  nor  of  any  principle  of  safety  or  propriety 
which  admits  of  the  States  becoming  such  recipients  of  gratuity  from  the  General 
Government." 

In  the  teeth  of  all  this,  the  specific  appropriation  in  that  bill  was 
afterwards  stricken  out.  The  money  was,  as  in  this,  "given  to  the 
States  in  their  corporate  capacity,  to  be  vested  by  them  in  their  public 
expenditure;"  and  the  bill,  as  it  ought  to  have  been,  even  on  its 
author's  own  reasoning,  was  then  virtually  vetoed  by  one  of  our  fear- 
less Presidents.  General  Jackson,  in  some  respects  uthe  noblest 
Roman  of  them  all"  dared  to  stem  the  tide  of  popular  delusion,  and 


ON  THE  LAND  DISTRIBUTION  BILL.  199 

coincided  in  the  principle  avowed  by  the  father  of  the  measure  at  the 
commencement  of  that  same  year,  when  he  (Mr.  Clay)  said,  ':I 
know  of  no  principle  in  the  constitution  wThich  authorizes  the  Federal 
Government  to  become  such  a  collector  for  the  States/'' 

Again,  in  1836,  the  distribution  was  made  of  a  surplus,  and  ono 
accidental,  not  designed  nor  permanent.  The  excess  was  also  not 
given  away,  but  loaned  on  deposite.  It  was  expressly  stipulated  to  be 
returned  whenever  needed  for  the  current  expenditures  of  the  General 
Government.  If  it  had  been  a  gift,  it  is  well  known  that  the  bill 
wTould  never  have  been  signed  by  the  executive.  Look,  also,  to  anal- 
ogies elsewhere.  Did  the  State  of  New  York,  in  1837,  give  money 
or  property  to  her  embarrassed  citizens  1  No,  sir.  On  the  contrary, 
it  made  a  loan,  both  in  form  and  substance.  Even  England,  with  her 
omnipotent  Parliament,  has  authorized  only  loans,  on  some  occasions, 
to  aid  her  mercantile  or  manufacturing  classes  in  great  commercial 
convulsions ;  but  seldom,  if  ever,  resorted  to  a  gift  so  lavish,  wasteful, 
and  unconstitutional,  as  the  present  one. 

The  tendency  of  this  measure,  in  another  respect,  goes  to  undermine 
the  strongest  foundations  of  our  present  form  of  government.  It 
changes,  in  a  most  important  particular,  the  whole  relations  between 
the  General  Government  and  the  States.  The  power  of  the  former  is 
fearfully  increased,  by  virtually  conferring  on  it  the  whole  taxing 
authority  for  the  whole  Union,  for  local  as  well  as  general  objects. 
This  power  of  taxation,  whether  by  direct  or  indirect  means, — by  stamp 
acts,  internal  duties,  or  excise, — is  all  to  be  concentrated  here,  and  the 
immense  resources  thus  accumulated,  as  well  as  our  present  vast  con- 
trol over  all  foreign  and  general  relations,  to  be  wielded  at  discretion 
by  a  great  central  consolidated  monarchy.  Yes,  sir ;  a  practical  mon- 
archy, ere  long,  in  such  an  event,  is  as  inevitable  as  that  the  gentlest 
gales  may  be  swollen  into  tempests,  and  pestilence  fester  into  death. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  States,  once  independent,  sink  into  most 
humiliating  reliance  for  daily  bread  on  their  former  servants.  The 
sovereigns  become  the  slaves.  Our  whole  system  becomes  metamor- 
phosed, and  the  original  attitudes  and  relations  between  the  members 
of  the  Union  and  the  Union  itself  are  virtually  dissolved.  This  I 
say,  sir,  from  personal  conviction ;  and  in  this  I  am  backed  by  the 
fearless  and  inflexible  freemen  of  the  State  I  help  to  represent.  At 
the  last  session  of  her  Legislature,  the  following,  among  other  saga- 
cious resolutions,  was  adopted : 

"Resolved,  That  the  distribution  of  the  public  revenue  —  whether  it  may  have 
accrued  from  the  proceeds  of  the  sales  of  the  public  lands,  or  otherwise  —  is  without 
sanction  in  the  constitution,  would  be  disastrous  to  the  prosperity  of  the  States,  and 
tend  to  destroy  that  due  relation  between  the  States  and  the  Federal  Government, 
to  preserve  which  should  be  the  paramount  object  of  legislation." 

Not  to  be  tedious  on  this,  I  pass  to  another  consideration,  which 
shows  the  direct  tendencies  of  this  measure  to  produce  what  most  of 


200  ON  THE  LAND   DISTKIBUTION  BILL. 

us  admit  to  be  clearly  unconstitutional.  It  is  this.  To  the  extent  of 
the  amount  distributed  to  the  indebted  States,  the  distribution  is  urged 
on  us,  as  it  substantially  is,  a  measure  designed  for  their  relief.  Such 
has  been  the  reasoning  of  distinguished  senators  in  this  chamber, — "  to 
relieve  the  old  States  in  embarrassment ;"  and,  as  the  executive 
message  says,  to  help  uthe  debtor  States"  High-minded  and  honor- 
able men  will  not  countenance  evasion,  but  look  through  the  mere 
surface  —  the  varnish.  What,  then,  is  a  measure  so  recommended, 
and  so  passed,  but,  in  substance,  to  the  amount  pledged  to  be  given,  an 
assumption  of  State  debts  ?  Why  else,  sir,  does  the  gentleman  from 
Virginia  appeal  so  eloquently  to  our  sympathies  in  behalf  of  the 
indebted  States  ?  Why,  sir,  did  the  chief  magistrate  himself  argue 
in  favor  of  the  measure  (under  certain  wise  limitations,  however,  here- 
after to  be  noticed),  except  that  it  would  relieve  the  indebted  States 
from  a  resort  to  oppressive  direct  taxation  ? 

Why  is  the  bill  to  be  passed  at  all  as  a  measure,  among  others, 
demanding  a  hasty  and  extraordinary  session,  if  not  designed  as  a 
relief  to  them,  by  furnishing  the  money  to  help  to  discharge  the  debts 
under  which  they  are  represented  to  be  now  suffering  so  deeply? 
Within  two  years  we  have  solemnly  resolved  that  the  assumption  of 
State  debts  is  not  warranted  by  the  constitution ;  so  has  the  President 
decided  in  his  message,  at  the  opening  of  the  present  session.  But  if 
we  promise  to  furnish  to  those  States  in  debt,  because  they  are  in 
debt,  and  need  relief,  the  money  to  help  to  pay  a  portion  of  their 
liabilities,  is  not  this  a  virtual  assumption  of  their  debts  to  that  extent? 
Will  it  not  increase  the  value,  in  the  market,  of  their  bonds,  to  the 
extent  of  that  assumption  ?  Base,  dishonorable,  craven,  would  it  be, 
for  us  to  attempt  by  indirection  what  we  are  ashamed  to  do  directly. 
Let  the  measure,  then,  stand  or  fall  on  its  real  character ;  and,  if  I  am 
capable  of  understanding  either  facts  or  principles,  the  constitution  is 
in  danger  of  being  thus  violated  in  a  most  essential  particular. 

To  dwell  no  longer  on  considerations  of  this  character,  I  shall  pass 
to  others  of  a  different  bearing,  after  invoking  the  attention  of  the 
Senate  a  moment  to  the  oppressive  departure  of  this  distribution  from 
that  equality  and  justice  among  the  members  of  the  Union,  which  are 
the  only  effectual  preservatives  of  either  the  constitution  or  the  Union. 
Thus  it  is  manifestly  a  measure  to  aid  the  indebted  States,  rather  than 
the  rest.  Nay,  more ;  it  is  done,  in  some  respects,  at  the  expense  of 
those  not  indebted,  as  you  tax  all  for  the  help  of  the  former.  The 
prudence  and  economy  of  the  latter  are  unjustly  requited.  They 
neither  need  your  distribution,  nor  can  they  willingly  submit  to  high 
taxation  for  the  benefit  of  others.  If  they  take  your  gifts,  they  will 
prove  like  Indian  gifts,  for  which  you  will  exact,  in  return,  much  more 
in  amount.  These  miscalled  donations  cannot,  by  them,  be  often 
employed  in  any  beneficial  manner,  without  a  risk  in  beginning  new 
works  or  new  speculations,  that  will  involve  them,  like  the  deposites  of 
1887,  in  larger  taxes  and  heavy  losses.     If  divided  per  capita  among 


ON   THE   LAND   DISTRIBUTION   BILL.  201 

their  citizens,  which  is  perhaps  the  more  just  course,  it  will  come  like 
money  won  by  chance,  or  drawn  in  a  lottery,  and  injure,  as  well  as 
corrupt,  most  of  those  connected  in  any  way  with  its  employment.  It 
will  prove  worse  than  the  Georgia  land  lotteries,  so  strongly  denounced 
by  others  in  this  debate ;  and,  like  the  gift  of  Pandora's  box,  be  fatal 
with  every  evil,  except  delusive  hope.  Thirteen  States  —  little 
indebted,  several  of  them  not  at  all,  and  the  whole  not  a  million  each 
on  an  average — are,  by  this  measure,  to  be  oppressed  and  demoralized, 
in  order  to  carry  this  distribution  into  other  States, — others,  too,  which 
need  only  because  they  have  been  less  frugal  and  provident.  What 
does  this  resemble  but  pillage  and  plunder,  under  the  forms  of  law  ? 
This  is  not  only  impolitic  and  unwise,  but  it  is  unjust,  immoral,  and 
destructive  of  every  fraternal  feeling  between  the  different  States. 

It  is  partial,  also,  to  the  west,  as  contradistinguished  from  the 
Atlantic,  so  as  in  a  material  respect  to  constitute  another  inequality 
among  members  of  the  same  Union,  possessing  equal  rights ;  because 
a  larger  portion  of  imported  articles  from  which  the  additional  tax  is 
to  be  obtained  is  consumed  on  the  seaboard.  The  articles  being 
cheaper  to  the  latter  than  the  former,  are  more  used,  and  the  latter 
are  by  habit  attached  to  their  use.  But  no  inequality  would  be 
caused,  if  the  distribution  was  not  made,  and  each  State  was  obliged  to 
supply  its  own  wants,  or  pay  its  own  debts,  by  its  own  system  of  taxa- 
tion. The  Western  States  obtain  also  ten  per  cent,  more  in  money, 
and  half  a  million  of  acres  more  in  land,  than  the  Atlantic  States ; 
and  thus  another  great  apparent  inequality  is  introduced.  Whatever 
increase  of  population  may  before  another  census  occur,  in  the  new 
States,  to  justify  this  in  some  degree,  it  has  not  yet  taken  place ;  and 
it  will  happen,  too,  in  some  of  the  Atlantic  States,  such  as  New  York 
and  Maine,  as  well  as  in  the  west.  Yet  the  last  States  get  neither 
the  ten  per  cent,  nor  the  half-million  acres  of  land ;  though,  on  that 
theory,  they  are  equally  and  justly  entitled  to  both.  Again,  this 
measure  discriminates  most  oppressively  against  and  in  favor  of  par- 
ticular classes.  Against  consumers,  who  lose  in  all  ways  by  it.  For 
manufacturers,  who  gain  on  almost  everything.  The  rich,  also,  are 
relieved  from  the  direct  taxes  of  the  States,  which  would  otherwise 
fall  chiefly  on  their  property  for  this  three  or  four  millions ;  and  the 
burden  is  transferred,  or  flung  in  a  great  measure  on  the  middling 
and  lower  classes,  the  agriculturists  and  mechanics,  who,  with  their 
families,  will  be  obliged  to  pay  quite  as  much,  under  the  proposed 
tariff,  as  the  most  opulent. 

It  is  thus  made  more  onerous  to  the  masses,  whose  wants,  on  the 
contrary,  most  need  relief,  and  a  neglect  of  whom  brought  the  Bour- 
bons to  the  guillotine.  It  will  tend  to  excite  retaliation  abroad  by 
higher  duties  on  foreign  products,  and  thus  derange  capital  at  home, 
circumscribe  commerce,  and  depress  some  branches  of  industry.  It 
may  alienate  whole  sections  of  the  Union,  as  it  revives  the  heart- 
burnings and  jealousies  that  preceded  the  last  tariff  compromise.     It 


202  ON   THE   LAND   DISTRIBUTION   BILL. 

is  not  like  a  national  bank,  nor  an  ordinary  bad  law,  such  as  the 
sedition  act,  which  operates  but  on  a  few,  or  temporarily.  It  rather 
poisons  the  whole  fabric  of  society,  and,  it  is  feared,  ineradicably.  It 
is  like  the  taste  of  that  forbidden  fruit  by  our  first  parents,  which 
brought  in  death  and  sin,  with  all  our  woes,  and  diffused  the  taint  of 
depravity  through  the  whole  of  their  erring  race. 

Beware,  then,  sir,  lest  the  first  step  in  this  distribution  be  not  the 
last  one,  —  the  fatal  step  to  the  preservation  of  the  constitution,  and 
the  peace,  as  well  as  perpetuity,  of  the  Union ! 

A  few  minutes  more,  sir,  on  the  other  tendencies  of  this  measure, 
independent  of  the  constitution. 

Why  have  I  before  called  it  exceedingly  impolitic?  Because  it  is  a 
measure  that,  under  the  existing  condition  of  the  treasury,  will  require 
us  first  to  collect  back  in  taxes  every  dollar  distributed  from  the  public 
lands.  This  is  amply  enough  to  stamp  the  measure  as  idle ;  and,  if 
intended  to  operate  equally,  as  useless.  But  this  is  not  all.  We  are 
next  compelled  to  collect  the  same  amount,  by  resorting  to  high  duties ; 
and  thus  greatly  increasing  the  expenses  of  collection,  in  order  to 
guard,  by  more  officers  and  cutters,  against  smuggling.  This  will 
obviate  all  the  usual  difference,  dwelt  on  by  the  senator  from  Virginia 
(Mr.  Archer),  in  favor  of  the  greater  cheapness  that  sometimes  exists 
in  collecting  indirect,  rather  than  direct  taxes.  That  senator  has, 
however,  entirely  overlooked  one  or  two  other  large  additions  to  the 
burdens  imposed,  over  and  above  the  amount  of  the  gift.  There  is 
the  new  and  extra  cost,  and  risk,  and  delay,  of  paying  over  and  trans- 
ferring this  money  to  the  States.  There  is  a  higher  price  paid  for  the 
domestic  manufacture,  whenever  its  rival  from  abroad  is  taxed,  and  is 
almost  equal  to  that  tax.  There  is  a  higher  price  also  for  the  profits 
of  the  different  dealers,  on  the  increased  cost  of  the  article,  by  means  of 
the  duties. 

There  is  an  augmented  burden,  as  before  explained,  flung  unjustly 
and  impoliticly  on  the  agriculturist,  to  aid  indirectly  the  manufac- 
turer ;  and  on  the  middling  and  less  wealthy  classes,  to  aid  the  rich. 
This  is  a  burden  from  which,  under  a  tariff  on  necessaries,  the  former 
cannot  escape,  as  the  senator  before  me  (Mr.  Archer)  has  hastily 
supposed,  unless  they  flee  from  civilization  to  more  than  savage  life. 

Under  most  tariffs,  when  judicious,  luxuries  alone  are  taxed  high, 
and  the  necessaries  of  life  are  left  either  low  or  entirely  free.  Then 
his  theory  would  be  plausible,  that  the  tax  would  fall  on  income  more 
than  capital,  and  would  be  usually  voluntary,  and  would  be  mostly 
avoided  by  not  consuming  luxuries.  But  here,  sir,  you  propose  to 
tax  almost  every  necessary  quite  as  high  as  the  most  useless  luxury ; 
and  he  that  would  avoid  the  tax  can  hardly  escape  it,  either  by  dying 
or  living.  It  infests  everything  and  everybody.  Let  one  return  to 
the  use  of  mere  bread  and  water :  even  the  water  he  must  drink  from 
a  gourd,  or  pay  a  tax  on  his  pitcher  and  tumbler ;  and  as  to  his  bread, 
—  the  grain  must  be  pulled,  and  not  reaped  with  a  taxed  sickle,  — 


ON   THE   LAND   DISTRIBUTION   BILL.  203 

must  be  eaten  without  salt,  molasses  or  sugar, — for  they  are  all  taxed 
as  high  as  the  most  costly  wines  and  splendid  jewelry.  More,  sir:  he 
must  wear  skins,  as  both  cottons  and  woollens  will  pay  a  large  duty. 
["  Coon-skins,"  said  Mr.  Sevier.]  Yes,  whig  "  coon-skins  and 
gourds."  He  cannot  venture  even  on  an  Indian  blanket,  it  is  taxed 
so  enormously ;  much  more,  buy  a  taxed  Indian  kettle,  or  use  even  a 
trap,  knife  or  rifle,  like  the  poorest  savage, — for  they  are  all  burdened 
to  help  pay  for  this  execrable  distribution.  He  must,  in  truth,  rebar- 
barize,  and  become  more  helpless  and  degraded  than  the  meanest 
savage,  in  order  to  realize  the  senator's  fancy  sketch  of  a  free,  inde- 
pendent and  prosperous  American,  avoiding  the  beautiful  and  benefi- 
cent operation  of  his  favorite  tariff  system,  by  not  using  taxed 
articles.  What  a  blessing  and  exemption  it  must  prove  to  the  Virginia 
planter,  as  well  as  the  farmer  of  the  east !  Does  not  the  gentleman  see, 
that,  in  the  great  use  of  foreign  iron,  neither  of  them  can  turn  a  furrow, 
without  a  tax  on  their  plough  and  chains ;  neither  weed  their  corn,  but 
with  taxed  hoes;  nor  load  nor  spread  their  manure,  without  taxed 
shovels;  nor  reap,  nor  mow,  nor  grind  their  grain,  without  being 
taxed  in  all  possible  ways  1  Not  even  a  horse-shoe  nor  a  knife  can 
escape. 

These  illustrations  might  be  followed  out  much  further,  to  show  the 
crying  impolicy  of  either  keeping  high  taxes  on  some  necessaries  or 
raising  them  on  others,  so  as  to  enable  us  to  give  away  the  proceeds 
of  the  public  lands.  But  I  hasten  over  them,  to  glance  a  minute  at 
another  striking  evidence  of  its  impolicy.  The  compromise  of  1833 
pacified  great  interests,  and  should  be  sacred.  This  act  violates  the 
spirit  of  that  compromise  in  several  essential  particulars.  It  first 
requires  an  increase  of  the  tariff  on  free  articles,  to  take  effect  before 
1842,  when,  if  the  lands  are  retained,  it  would  not  be  necessary  on 
those  articles,  either  at  all,  or  certainly  not  till  the  periods  indicated  in 
the  act  of  1833.  It  next  requires  an  increase  of  duties,  under  this 
distribution,  and  on  account  of  it,  which  would  not  be  necessary  for 
revenue,  without  so  wasteful  a  gift.  Now,  an  augmentation  of  revenue 
for  this  gift,  and  not  "for  an  economical  administration  of  the  govern- 
ment," which  is  the  express  limitation  of  the  compromise,  is  as  much 
a  violation  of  the  spirit  of  the  compromise  as  it  would  be  to  raise  the 
tariff  above  twenty  per  cent.  It  is  likely,  also,  that,  ere  long,  the  tariff 
must  and  will  be  raised  on  some  articles  above  twenty  per  cent.,  and 
the  restrictive  clause  against  stopping  the  distribution  be  then  repealed, 
or  evaded  by  an  improper  resort  to  more  loans  in  peace.  Because, 
without  a  great  change  in  policy  and  prospects,  it  can  hardly  be  pos- 
sible to  meet  the  increasing  expenses  of  the  government,  unless  heavier 
taxes,  or  a  retention  of  the  income  of  the  public  lands,  takes  place.  If, 
to  escape  it,  we  plunge  into  a  larger  debt  in  time  of  peace,  and  build 
up  unnecessarily  a  class  of  dronish  fundholders,  the  impolicy  of  the 
distribution  will  be  no  less  manifest. 

So,  whether  we  halt  in  taxes  at  twenty  per  cent,  and  resort  to  loans. 


204  ON   THE   LAND   DISTRIBUTION   BILL. 

or  go  higher  and  not  resort  to  them,  the  design  of  the  compromise  is 
violated,  and  this  measure  becomes  very  impolitic.  Forcing  us  up 
even  to  twenty  per  cent.,  to  give  away,  is  outrageous.  Why,  sir,  a 
twenty  per  cent,  tax,  and  that  on  necessaries,  is  double  the  odious 
tithe  tax  of  church  and  state,  from  which  we  so  often  boast  an  exemp- 
tion in  this  land  of  republican  liberty ;  so  a  twenty  per  cent,  tax  on 
tea  is  double  the  British  tax  of  three  cents  a  pound  on  tea,  which 
helped  so  powerfully,  by  its  oppression,  to  drive  our  fathers  into 
rebellion. 

Proceed,  then,  if  you  will,  in  this  ruinous  career.  Break  through, 
then,  as  you  will  and  must  at  this  or  the  next  session,  the  sacred 
compromise.  Borrow  largely,  or  go  up  to  twenty-five  or  thirty  per 
cent.,  as  is  probable,  in  taxes,  not  to  meet  necessary  expenses,  but  lav- 
ish ones,  and  to  enable  us  to  make  this  fatal  gift.  Destroy  your 
pledged,  recorded  faith  with  the  south.  Arouse  again,  as  in  1831 
and  '2,  brother  against  brother,  State  against  State.  Cast  once  more 
an  apple  of  discord, — a  firebrand  into  every  region  of  our  happy 
Union.  Prepare  to  blot  the  glorious  star  of  State  after  State  from 
the  constellation  of  the  Union.  But  reconsider,  I  beseech  you,  all  the 
direful  consequences,  before  you  strike  the  first  blow. 

I  pass  by  more  of  its  impolicy  on  other  accounts,  to  add  that,  in  the 
present  juncture,  the  distribution  is  peculiarly  ill-timed,  as  well  as 
impolitic.  Have  you  not  heard,  sir,  from  your  own  friends,  till  we 
are  almost  deaf,  that  the  General  Government  is,  at  this  moment, 
almost  insolvent, — that  its  debts  are  large,  and  that  they,  as  well  as 
its  expenses,  are  fearfully  increasing  ?  And  is  this  a  time  to  part 
with  all  our  permanent  and  valuable  income  ?  Is  this  a  time  for  a 
self-styled  republican  to  seem  to  sneer  like  some  senators  at  economy '? 
To  give  away  our  great  means,  not  only  of  making  preparation,  but 
of  furnishing  security  for  necessary  loans  ? 

Why,  sir,  such  a  spendthrift  course  in  an  individual,  as  to  his  pri- 
vate affairs,  would  subject  him,  in  New  England,  to  be  placed  under 
guardianship ;  and,  in  the  South,  I  apprehend  that  he  would  hardly  be 
saved  from  the  insane  hospital.     We  must  tear  off  the  mask,  or  be  lost. 

There  is  a  deeper  question  still,  as  to  the  time.  Are  our  forts  not 
said  to  be  dilapidated,  and  some  of  them  occupied  only  by  bats  and 
owls?  Is  our  navy  not  represented  as  rotting  down?  our  naval 
steam-batteries  few  and  inefficient '?  and  an  enemy  almost  thundering 
at  the  gates  of  the  capitol  1 

Never,  no,  never,  sir,  can  it  be  wise,  in  such  an  emergency,  with 
such  evil  portents  in  every  quarter,  to  strip  ourselves  naked  and 
defenceless,  before  a  bold,  enterprising,  and  bitter  foe.  Under  a  form 
of  government  the  most  difficult  in  the  world  to  prepare  seasonably 
for  war,  we  deliberately  remove  from  it  the  means  already  possessed 
for  such  wise  preparation.  We  refuse  the  wise  motion  of  the  senator 
on  my  right  (Mr.  Linn),  to  dedicate  these  lands  to  that  impending 


ON  THE  LAND   DISTRIBUTION  BILL.  205 

necessity ;  and  we  do  it,  as  he  eloquently  described,  when  surrounded 
with  dangers  on  all  sides,  of  almost  every  degree  of  horror. 

The  burning  of  the  Caroline,  and  the  murder  of  our  citizens,  are 
still  in  controversy ;  the  north-eastern  boundary  unsettled,  and  hang- 
ing like  a  dark  cloud  over  that  frontier ;  the  mouth  of  the  Oregon  per- 
haps to  be  fought  for ;  the  confiscation  of  our  slaves  in  the  Bermudas 
persisted  in ;  our  peaceful  merchantmen  seized,  and,  with  deep  humil- 
iation to  us,  searched  on  the  coast  of  Africa ;  Indian  massacre  menaced 
on  the  western  frontier,  and  a  servile  insurrection  meditated  by  Brit- 
ish fanaticism  in  the  fair  savannas  of  the  south.  Yet  this  is  the 
crisis  seized  on,  not  only  to  give  away  large  resources,  but  to  give 
them  for  the  avowed  purpose  of  being  paid  over  to  our  haughty  ene- 
mies. Let  the  States  themselves  faithfully  perform  their  obligations, 
as  they  doubtless  will,  in  time,  to  all, — even  to  England.  But  let  not 
us,  who  are  under  no  contract  to  advance  this  money,  give  it  away 
virtually  to  strengthen  our  foes, — we,  who  owe  her  nothing,  except 
reprisals  or  punishment.  It  has  long  been  quoted  as  an  illustration  of 
Dutch  cupidity,  that  gunpowder  was,  for  gain,  allowed  to  be  sold  during 
war  to  their  enemies.  But  in  this  we  evince  the  still  greater  stupidity 
of  virtually  giving  gunpowder  to  our  enemies.  We  furnish,  too,  by 
this  distribution,  at  this  ill-timed  and  ill-starred  moment,  under  a  con- 
dition to  be  suspended  when  actual  war  happens,  a  sort  of  pledge  to 
our  enemies,  that,  however  much  we  are  encroached  on,  however 
insulted,  however  dishonored,  peace  is  not  likely  to  be  interrupted  by 
the  States  or  the  people,  as  in  that  event  the  distribution  will  be 
recalled.  What  a  degrading  policy  !  How  derogatory  the  tendency  ! 
What  a  moral  for  history ! 

But,  with  these  proceeds  wisely  devoted  to  preparation  in  peace  for 
defence  in  war,  an  inland  frontier  of  five  thousand  miles  in  extent  can 
be  strengthened  at  the  most  exposed  points,  and  armed  freemen  pro- 
tect the  rest  with  their  bayonets.  A  sea-coast  of  two  thousand  miles 
can  be,  in  time,  studded  with  forts  and  batteries,  and  our  populous  marts 
of  commerce,  instead  of  being  naked  to  the  assaults  of  invaders  stim- 
ulated by  the  prospect  of  booty  and  beauty,  will  be  skilfully  pro- 
tected from  conflagration  and  pillage. 

One  remaining  view  of  the  whole  subject,  and  I  close. 

All  the  brilliant  expectations  now  formed  of  this  distribution  are 
proved  to  be  delusive.  The  whole  history  and  character  of  the  meas- 
ure show  that  it  has  changed  within  the  last  fifteen  years,  so  as  now  to 
be  vitally  different  from  what  it  was  at  first.  Those  individuals, 
therefore,  who  formerly  approved,  could  now  consistently  oppose  dis- 
tribution. Those  States,  likewise,  who  have  formed  expectations  of 
advantage  under  different  circumstances,  and  then  desired  the  distri- 
bution, might  now  properly  resist  it,  as  an  eventual  injury.  There  has 
been  inattention,  in  some  quarters,  to  these  essential  differences.  Oth- 
ers have  looked  only  to  the  dazzling  lustre  of  a  large  gift,  without 
considering  that,  in  the  present  exigency,  it  is  a  deluding  appearance 
18 


206  ON  THE  LAND   DISTRIBUTION  BILL. 

of  generosity,  without  being  really  beneficial  to  either  the  General 
Government,  the  States  as  a  whole,  or  the  people  at  large.  This  can 
be  shown  to  a  certainty  almost  equalling  mathematical  demonstration. 
Analyze  the  matter  a  moment.  Most  assuredly  the  General  Govern- 
ment can  gain  nothing  by  the  operation  finally,  but  a  character  for 
stupidity  in  relinquishing,  when  much  needed,  a  certain  and  large 
source  of  income,  and  the  odium  of  resorting  to  higher  taxes  instead 
of  it.  It  introduces,  also,  into  the  finances,  when  deranged  by  a 
repeal  of  the  sub-treasury  and  a  new  system  of  large  loans,  an  ele- 
ment of  disturbance  novel  and  wide-spread, — a  hazardous  transfer  of 
three  millions  of  distribution  into  the  different  States,  however  remote 
from  the  usual  channels  of  commerce.  How  much  this,  like  the  dis- 
tribution in  1837,  may  help  to  injure  the  banking  institutions  and 
derange  the  exchanges,  time  only  can  determine. 

Politically,  the  General  Government  becomes  still  more  unfavorably 
affected,  by  acting  in  the  menial  character  of  a  tax-collector  for  others. 
And,  however  its  power  may  be  thus  fearfully  enlarged,  and  in  time 
abused,  it  loses  much  dignity, — it  ceases  to  be  respected,  though 
dreaded,  and  exchanges  tranquillity,  as  well  as  esteem,  for  the  miseries 
which  must  eventually  come  of  anarchy,  disunion,  or  tyranny. 

In  regard  to  the  States,  taken  together,  if  the  distribution  be  equal, 
and  only  a  like  sum  is  to  be  returned  to  us  in  new  taxes,  they  can 
gain  nothing ;  if  it  be  unequal,  as  it  is,  we  have  treated  some  with 
gross  partiality,  and  some  with  wicked  injustice.  So  much  for  its  fis- 
cal effect  on  them  generally.  But,  if  a  larger  sum  is  to  be  returned,  or 
rather  collected  from  their  inhabitants,  in  consequence  of  this  distribu- 
tion, as  has  been  before  demonstrated  to  be  the  case,  then  an  actual 
monied  loss  is  inflicted  on  the  States  as  a  whole.  All  the  States, 
too,  must  lose  in  relative  power  with  the  General  Government  politi- 
cally ;  all  must  feel  humiliated  by  receiving  a  sort  of  alms,  and  all 
must,  in  time,  sink  from  proud  sovereignties  into  little  more  than 
dependent  provinces,  or  tributary  counties.  But  it  may  be  asked,  do 
not  even  the  indebted  States  gain  something  1  Not  a  dollar,  if  the 
distribution  is  equal,  because  they  receive  no  larger  a  proportion  of 
the  proceeds  of  the  lands  than  the  States  not  indebted,  and,  as  for- 
merly explained,  they  must  have  collected  from  them,  under  the  tariff, 
if  equal,  even  a  larger  amount  than  the  sum  received.  How  can  it, 
then,  be  accounted  for  that  these  indebted  States  are  anxious  for  the 
measure?  I  answer,  because  the  tax  will  hereafter  be  collected  to 
that  amount  by  the  General  Government,  rather  than  by  the  States ; 
that  is  the  whole  advantage.  While,  to  counterbalance  it,  more  is 
obliged  to  be  collected  from  their  citizens ;  and  just  offence  is  given  to 
the  States  not  indebted,  that  they  are  to  be  taxed  higher  when  not  in 
debt  themselves,  nor  wanting  the  proceeds  themselves,  but  fleeced  as 
they  are  for  the  accommodation  of  other  States,  more  improvident, 
wasteful,  and,  in  a  fiscal  view,  less  deserving.  Even  the  others  have 
often  been  deceived  into  resolutions  and  approvals  favorable  to  a  dis- 


ON   THE   LAND   DISTRIBUTION   BILL.  207 

tribution,  under  the  false  notion  that  there  is  a  spare  surplus,  and  that 
taxes  need  not  be  raised  higher  in  consequence  of  the  gift,  and  that 
the  amount  received  will  be  a  vast  relief  to  them  in  the  discharge  of 
their  indebtedness.  The  fallacy  of  these  expectations  has  already  been 
made  manifest,  except  the  last,  which,  if  possible,  will  appear,  on 
examination,  more  utterly  groundless  and  delusive  than  the  others. 
In  fact,  the  indebted  States  do  not  procure  a  dollar  more  towards  pay- 
ing their  debts  than  is  raised  by  the  tariff  from  their  own  citizens,  nor 
indeed  so  much.  Again,  the  whole  sum  obtained  by  this  arrangement 
is  a  mere  drop  in  the  bucket  to  help  the  indebted  States  to  meet  their 
obligations.  Thus,  for  example,  half  of  the  twenty-six  States  owe  the 
whole  debt,  except  about  thirteen  millions  01*  dollars.  The  sum  they 
all  owe  at  this  time  cannot  fall  much  short  of  two  hundred  millions, 
of  which  this  three  millions'  gift,  if  all  going  to  that  purpose,  would 
pay  about  one-seventieth  only  of  the  principal,  leaving  sixty -nine  parts 
of  it,  out  of  seventy,  still  to  be  raised  by  the  States  themselves,  under 
their  own  taxation.  What  impotent  relief!  What  a  mockery  to 
those  who  have  been  flattered  with  the  false  hopes  that  this  distribu- 
tion was  alone  to  save  them  from  insolvency,  and  extinguish  the  whole, 
or  nearly  the  whole,  of  their  imprudent  liabilities !  Shame  on  such 
delusions  !  Not  to  dwell  too  long  in  details,  I  pass  by  many  connected 
with  this  topic,  to  say  that  the  single  case  of  Pennsylvania  may  illus- 
trate most  fully  the  inefficiency  of  this  distribution  to  extricate  from 
difficulty  that  class  of  States. 

[Here  Mr.  Clay,  of  Kentucky,  asked,  across  the  Senate-chamber, 
What  will,  you  do  with  North  Carolina,  who  owes  nothing  ?  Mr.  W. 
replied,  If  the  gentleman  will  have  patience  a  moment  longer,  I  will 
show  that  the  States  not  indebted  are  worse  treated,  and  will  fare 
worse,  than  those  which  are  indebted.] 

Pennsylvania  owes  near  forty  millions.  Her  annual  interest  cannot 
be  much,  if  any,  less  than  two  millions.  Her  share  in  the  distribution, 
at  $10,000  for  each  electoral  vote,  will  be  about  $300,000.  This 
would  pay  so  little  of  the  principal  as  to  leave  undischarged  $39,700,- 
000,  and,  what  is  a  more  just  view,  would  leave,  of  the  interest  alone, 
to  be  still  raised  from  taxation  and  her  other  resources,  $1,700,000 
yearly,  without  extinguishing  then  a  single  dollar  of  the  immense 
forty  million  principal.  This  is  a  sample  of  the  whole.  I  know,  sir, 
that  this  great  Keystone  State  in  politics  is  also  able  to  develop  her 
immense  resources,  and  discharge  punctually  and  honorably  all  her 
obligations.  I  entertain  as  little  doubt  that  she  is  willing  to  do  it, — 
is  doing  it,  and  will  prove  successful, — even  the  Keystone  in  her 
financial  energies,  as  well  as  in  her  politics.  But  it  is  demonstrable 
that,  to  accomplish  it,  she  must  put  her  own  shoulder  to  the  wheel,  and 
never  rely  on  this  deluding,  paltry,  derogatory,  beggarly,  false  char- 
ity of  the  distribution.  If  the  value  of  State  stocks  should  be  raised 
by  it,  the  gain  would  be  to  the  holder, —  often  a  speculator  and  for- 
eigner,— and  not  to  the  States,  unless  they  sell  more,  which  is  to  be 


208  ON   THE   LAND   DISTRIBUTION   BILL. 

deprecated  and  prevented,  rather  than  encouraged.  Now,  sir,  a  moment 
to  the  States  not  indebted,  including  North  Carolina,  and  a  reply  to 
the  question  of  the  senator  from  Kentucky.  Several  of  that  class,  five 
or  six  in  number,  owe  nothing,  and  some  so  little  that  the  thirteen 
together  are,  as  before  remarked,  indebted  but  thirteen  millions  in  the 
aggregate.  They  throw  one  hundred  and  six  electoral  votes,  and 
hence  would  receive  over  a  million,  or  one-third  of  the  whole  distribu- 
tion. Is  this  a  blessing,  or  a  curse  in  disguise,  even  to  them  ?  First, 
they  receive  it  when  not  needed  to  pay  principal  or  interest  of  their 
debts ;  next,  they  receive  it  when  not  wanted  for  works  of  internal 
improvement,  or  colonization,  or  even  education.  Their  other  resources 
for  these  purposes  are  ample, —  or  they  have  no  roads  or  canals  to 
make  which  would  be  profitable,  or  not  involve  them  in  further  and 
ruinous  expenditure,  and  many  have  no  blacks  to  colonize. 

Furthermore,  if  they  had  all  those  things  to  be  done,  they  could 
more  economically,  by  their  State  system  of  taxation,  collect  this  very 
million  of  dollars,  than  have  it  collected  from  them  as  it  is  now  to  be 
by  the  General  Government,  with  costs,  commissions,  interest,  and 
other  additions  ;  and  then  only  the  naked  sum  handed  back  as  a  dis- 
tribution —  a  gift  and  a  blessing  —  which  they  themselves  have  been 
obliged  to  contribute  from  the  sweat  of  their  own  brows. 

This,  then,  is  the  subtle  Greek  gift,  to  be  feared  most  by  them. 
This  your  relief —  your  whig  relief !  The  generous  dealing  with  the 
States  not  indebted  is,  to  give  them  not  a  single  dollar  but  what  is 
extracted  from  them  again  in  taxes ;  in  most  cases,  to  collect  even 
more ;  to  subject  many  of  them  to  this  taxation,  when  they  do  not 
need  the  proceeds  of  it ;  to  force  them  often  into  wasteful  extrava- 
gance with  it,  and  cause  still  further  taxation  to  meet  that ;  or,  if 
loaned  out  for  profit,  to  become  brokers,  and  lend  it  to  large  corpora- 
tions ;  or,  if  distributed  per  capita,  to  promote  dissipation  and  waste 
in  those  receiving  it,  as  if  it  was  some  gambling  lottery,  or  other 
chance  windfall,  which  is  usually  most  pernicious  and  immoral  in  its 
operation.  But  there  are,  sir,  back  of  all  these,  some  considerations 
affecting  injuriously  both  the  indebted  and  non-indebted  States.  By 
changing  the  system  of  taxation  from  one  chiefly  direct  to  one  indirect, 
and  by  throwing  the  collection  of  it  to  a  distance  on  the  General  Gov- 
ernment, instead  of  bringing  it  home  by  State  officers  to  their  own 
doors,  openly  " eating  up  their  substance,"  the  States,  in  appearance, 
feel  the  tax  less,  while  their  citizens,  in  truth,  pay  more.  The  States 
are  tempted,  not  only,  in  fact,  to  increase  the  public  burdens  in  this 
way,  but  to  embark  in  additional  enterprises,  larger  expenditures,  and 
to  conduct  their  whole  finances  in  a  more  profuse  and  even  prodigal 
manner.  Beside  this,  and  over  all  this,  a  greater  portion  of  the  tax 
is  thus  wrung  from  the  consuming  States,  that  do  not  manufacture, 
and  a  greater  benefit  conferred  on  other  States,  that  do. 

In  every  way,  then,  as  regards  the  States  in  their  separate  State 
capacities,  the  distribution  is  a  delusion  to  all,  unequal  and  unjust  to 


ON  THE  LAND  DISTRIBUTION  BILL.  209 

many,  really  beneficial  to  none ;  and,  fiscally,  as  well  as  politically, 
to  the  whole,  most  pernicious  in  its  tendencies. 

But  when  we  turn  a  moment  to  the  people  as  individuals,  and 
without  reference  to  their  governments,  whether  State  or  Federal,  the 
operation  of  this  measure  is  oppressive  in  the  extreme. 

Beside  its  general  tendency  to  relieve  property  or  capital  from  tax- 
ation, as  admitted  by  the  senator  before  me  (Mr.  Archer),  and  thus 
to  relieve  the  rich  who  own  it,  and  who  least  need  relief  as  a  class, — 
beside  its  temptation  to  make  more  expenditure  and  debt,  which  aid 
the  same  class,  and  to  assist  the  foreign  and  domestic  fundholder,  who 
often  bought  in  on  speculation,  and  undeservedly  has  got  a  new  secu- 
rity to  the  small  extent  of  the  amount  paid  over  by  us  to  the  indebted 
States  (and  who  are,  in  truth,  the  only  persons  aided  by  it,  except 
jobbers  in  politics,  as  well  as  in  stocks), — the  change  which  it  forces  in 
the  tariff  operates  on  a  vast  majority  of  the  community  with  a  most 
destructive  partiality. 

Thus, —  for  a  single  example,  which  will  come  home  in  its  details  to 
the  business  and  bosoms  of  all, —  in  consequence  of  giving  away,  by 
this  distribution,  three  millions  of  the  proceeds  of  the  public  lands,  it 
is  proposed  to  reduce  the  duties  on  no  necessaries  of  life,  but,  among 
other  things,  to  raise  them  twenty  per  cent,  on  tea  and  coffee. 

Now,  sir,  this  last  will  yield,  on  our  average  consumption,  only  about 
two  millions,  and  not,  as  misapprehended  by  many,  nearly  three  mil- 
lions. The  duties  on  salt  and  molasses  are  now  about  one  and  a  half 
millions,  and  in  1842,  when  at  twenty  per  cent.,  will  not  much,  if  any, 
exceed  one  million.  Hence  it  follows,  that  both  salt  and  molasses 
might  be  made  free,  and  coffee  and  tea  left  free,  if  we  did  not  give  away 
this  three  millions,  and,  in  consequence  of  it,  require  the  high  tax  of 
twenty  per  cent,  to  be  retained  on  salt  and  molasses,  and  as  high  an 
one  to  be  imposed  anew  on  tea  and  coffee.  Hence,  sir,  you  see  the 
first  bitter  fruits  to  the  middling  and  poorer  classes  over  the  whole 
country  of  this  boasted  benevolent  distribution, —  a  tax  on  four  of  their 
greatest  necessaries,  quite  three  millions  in  amount,  which  might  oth- 
erwise be  entirely  free. 

But  this  is  not  the  worst  feature  in  the  oppression  thus  caused  to 
the  farming  interest,  mechanics  with  small  estates,  and  last,  though 
not  least,  to  the  mere  laboring  classes  of  every  kind  of  workmen. 
They,  all  together,  constitute  much  of  the  bone  and  muscle  of  the 
community ;  and  not  only  the  physical  power,  but  much  of  the  sound 
intellect,  the  useful  intelligence,  the  soul,  the  morals,  the  industry,  and 
life-blood  of  society.  It  becomes,  virtually,  an  abhorrent  poll-tax  on 
these  classes  for  a  large  portion  of  this  unnecessary  burthen.  This  is 
not  a  popular  tirade.  To  prove  by  facts,  and  to  see  ourselves  how 
they  are  treated  by  this  change  in  the  system  of  collecting  three  mil- 
lions by  the  tariff  instead  of  the  States, —  a  change  so  much  lauded 
by  the  senator  from  Virginia, —  let  us  examine  a  single  computation. 
Take  my  own  State,  and  which,  in  this  respect,  may  be  a  fair  sample, 
18* 


210  ON   THE   LAND   DISTRIBUTION   BILL. 

not  only  for  the  interior  of  the  east,  but  of  the  whole  Union.  The  pop- 
ulation of  New  Hampshire  is  a  little  less  than  300,000,  paying  a 
State,  county,  pauper,  and  school  tax,  of  not  over  $300,000,  or  a 
dollar  per  head.  Of  this,  a  small  farmer,  with  a  family  of  five  chil- 
dren, making  seven, —  the  average  number  of  a  family, —  would  not 
generally  pay  over  five  dollars ;  because  our  system,  as  that  of  other 
States,  is  to  collect  taxes  chiefly  from  capital,  valuable  houses  and 
lands,  from  stock  in  trade,  money  at  interest,  bank-shares,  horses,  &c. 
In  tins  condition  of  things  the  distribution  is  made,  and  New  Hamp- 
shire, with  her  present  electoral  vote,  would  receive  $70,000.  If  this 
amount  was  then  to  be  supplied,  as  it  must  be,  by  taxes,  and  those 
collected  under  our  State  system,  rather  than  by  the  proposed  resort 
to  the  tariff,  the  farmer  and  his  family  of  seven  would  pay  only  $1.16 
more.  But,  by  an  increased  duty  of  twenty  per  cent,  on  tea  and  coffee 
alone,  which  equals  only  two  millions,  and  hence  would,  or  should,  to 
be  equal,  impose  on  New  Hampshire  only  two-thirds  of  the  $70,000, 
he  has  to  pay  about  $1.77  instead  of  $1.16,  being  an  addition,  or  loss 
to  each  farmer,  of  more  than  fifty  per  cent.  Thus,  on  a  pound  and  a 
half  of  tea, — the  average  consumption  per  head, — it  is  nine  cents,  which, 
for  seven  persons,  is  sixty-three  cents.  On  six  pounds  of  coffee  per 
head,  at  two  cents  a  pound,  is  twelve  cents ;  and  for  seven  persons, 
eighty-four.  These  alone  make  $1.47.  Add  to  these  the  assessment 
above  twenty  per  cent,  for  home  valuation,  the  increased  price  for 
cash  duties,  and  the  profits  of  the  intermediate  dealers  on  those,  and 
the  duty,  and  they  constitute,  on  the  whole,  a  higher  charge  yearly  to 
each  farmer,  by  at  least  thirty  cents  more.  This  would  make  $1.77 
paid  to  raise  only  two-thirds  the  amount,  instead  of  $1.16,  paid  under 
a  State  tax,  to  raise  the  whole.  Thus  it  is  manifest  that  he  pays  in 
tins  way  sixty-one  cents  more  on  these  articles  alone,  or  above  fifty 
per  cent,  more,  than  he  would  under  the  State  taxes ;  and,  beside  all 
this,  is  continued  to  be  subjected  to  twenty  per  cent,  taxes  on  all  his 
salt  and  molasses,  that  might  otherwise  be  free. 

But  take  the  class  of  laborers  and  artisans,  who  pay  merely  a  poll  tax, 
or  that  and  a  cow  or  small  house  and  garden,  which  might  make  their 
whole  State  taxation,  with  a  family  of  seven,  not  exceed  a  dollar  or  a 
dollar  and  a  quarter.  This  class  drink  as  much  coffee  and  tea,  usually, 
as  the  farmer  himself,  and  their  additional  tax  on  them  would  be  near 
$1.77,  while  the  increase  of  the  State  tax,  to  raise  a  like  sum,  would 
not  be  over  twenty-five  or  thirty  cents ;  making  a  discrimination  against 
that  whole  class  of  equal  to  six  or  seven  hundred  per  cent.,  and  making 
them  use  taxed  salt  and  taxed  molasses,  daily  and  hourly  taxed  neces- 
saries, instead  of  free  ones. 

These  two  great  classes  of  people,  thus  oppressed  by  such  a  system, 
constitute  more  than  one-half  of  the  population  of  most  of  the  States ; 
and,  while  we  both  lower  and  raise  the  tariff,  to  benefit  wealthy  cap- 
italists engaged  in  manufactures, —  not  one  to  ten  so  numerous  as  agri- 
culturists,— while  we  change  the  system  of  taxation  avowedly  to  relieve 


ON   THE   LAND    DISTRIBUTION   BILL.  211 

property  and  the  rich,  we  do  this  at  the  expense  of  the  more  neces- 
sitous, and  of  the  great  masses.  Thus  we  utterly  neglect  the  greatest 
good  of  the  greatest  number.  The  extent  of  the  inequality  and  out- 
rage can  hardly  be  comprehended,  sir,  till  you  consider,  that  if  only 
half  of  the  population  of  the  United  States  consist  of  these  classes, 
and  if  they  suffer  by  this  unjust  discrimination  only  three-fourths  of 
a  dollar  to  each  family  of  seven,  it  must  be  a  loss  yearly  to  them  of 
nearly  a  million  of  dollars. 

What  a  wretched  cheat,  as  well  as  rank  oppression,  must  the  whole 
measure,  then,  prove  to  be  in  practice  to  the  people  at  large  !  In  this 
age  of  the  schoolmaster  abroad,  and  the  great  power  of  the  press,  do 
you  expect  them  to  be  blind  as  well  as  deaf,  and  senseless  to  such 
injustice  1  "No,  sir.  An  act  like  this  may  be  passed  under  impulses, 
—  it  may  answer  a  temporary  end,  if  adopted,  to  advance  the  interests 
of  unscrupulous  demagogues,  and  political  jobbers  as  well  as  stockjob- 
bers. But  surely  it  will  deprave,  degrade,  and  defraud,  all  connected 
with  the  miserable  delusion.  Surely,  the  sound  statesman,  as  well  as 
the  virtuous  yeomanry  of  the  country,  will,  when  fully  possessed  of 
all  the  facts  and  principles  adverse  to  its  adoption,  lament  and  depre- 
cate a  measure  so  pregnant  with  evil. 

I  may  have  failed  to  collect  and  present  the  most  important  of  those 
facts  and  principles,  so  as  now  to  produce  such  a  conviction.  Certainly 
I  have  not  such  confidence  in  my  success  as  to  anticipate  a  rejection 
of  this  bill,  unless  gentlemen  opposite  will  condescend  to  examine  fur- 
ther for  themselves,  and  postpone  a  final  decision  till  they  can  coolly 
and  conscientiously  revise  previous  impressions.  If  they,  however,  will 
neither  delay  the  measure  nor  reject  it,  I  am  not  without  some  faint 
hope  that  it  may  never  become  a  law  of  the  land.  There  is  another 
high  tribunal  under  the  constitution  whose  ordeal  it  must  pass.  From 
the  past  scenes  of  this  session,  where  the  President,  under  a  fearful 
responsibility,  has  exhibited  the  lofty  moral  sublimity  of  preferring 
duty  to  party,  and  has,  by  his  example,  recalled  to  memory  some  of 
the  best  days  of  either  modern  or  ancient  republics,  I  expect  at  least 
a  full  and  fair  consideration  of  the  measure.  I  neither  ask  nor  wish 
from  the  President  any  sacrifices  of  principle  on  this  or  any  other 
measure.  But  I  do  trust  that  he  will  consider  the  substance  more 
than  the  form  of  the  present  act ;  and  if,  as  a  senator,  he  voted 
against  the  similar  bill  of  1832,  at  a  time  when  there  was  a  surplus 
existing,  or  anticipated,  rather  than,  as  now,  a  deficiency  and  a  resort 
to  additional  taxes  rendered  indispensable,  and  at  a  time  when  it  was 
admitted  by  friends  of  the  measure  that  a  bill  in  this  form,  and  under 
present  circumstances,  would  be  without  constitutional  sanction,  he 
must  now,  as  President,  certainly  hesitate,  if  looking  to  consistency, 
as  well  as  constitutional  duty. 

He  must  see,  also,  great  doubts  in  collecting  money  by  one  ratio 
under  the  constitution,  and  in  distributing  it  by  another,  and  in  con- 
forming neither  to  the  idea  of  a  debt  or  trust  due  to  the  States,  nor  to 


212 


NATIONAL  FINANCES. 


any  rule  of  specific  appropriation  of  this  money  as  a  gift  or  grant,  but 
rather  make  it  to  aid  in  the  discharge  or  assumption  of  State  debts,  or 
some  other  objects  which  cannot,  by  possibility,  come  within  any  fair 
constitutional  power  over  these  delicate  and  highly  responsible  mat- 
ters. 

But  no  more  of  this.  If  all  here  fails,  there  is  still  another  power, 
—  another  tribunal,  above  either  Senates  or  Presidents, —  which  I  trust 
in  God  will  set  everything  right.  This  bill  cannot  go  into  actual  operation 
till  next  year.  In  the  mean  time,  and  before  the  leprosy  of  corruption 
can  penetrate  and  taint  the  body  politic,  the  people  may  get  light  more 
full  and  unclouded.  The  blue  sky  of  hope  is  gleaming  out  in  various 
quarters.  Let  discussion  and  examination,  reason  and  justice,  a  sense 
of  equal  rights  among  all  the  members  of  the  Union  and  all  classes 
of  the  community,  be  roused  and  electrify  the  whole.  Then  repeal 
will  be  invoked  in  a  voice  wide,  deep,  and  irresistible.  No  difficulty 
in  the  way  can  arise,  as  to  vested  rights  or  violated  compacts.  The 
whole  matter  is  public  in  its  origin,  public  in  its  progress,  public  in  its 
ends. 

Let  the  great  conservative  power  in  our  system,  then,  be  honestly 
and  faithfully  appealed  to,  and  a  repeal  will,  in  my  apprehension, 
become  as  certain  by  the  fiat  of  the  people,  as  are  the  movements  of 
that  omnipotent  Providence,  which  controls  not  only  the  planetary 
system,  but  all  human  designs. 


NATIONAL  FINANCES.* 


All  admit  that  this  is  an  alarming  exigency  in  our  financial  affairs. 
The  bill  on  your  table,  as  well  as  the  proposed  amendment  to  it,  both 
look  to  the  dire  necessity  of  borrowing  something,  not  only  in  a  period 
of  profound  peace,  but  at  a  moment  when  our  credit  has  suddenly 
become  much  depreciated ;  friends  and  foes  must,  therefore,  be  anxious 
to  effect  a  loan  on  the  best  terms  which  are  practicable.  As  a  gen- 
eral rule,  the  loan  should  be  small  in  amount  as  possible ;  and  the  best 
terms  would  certainly  be  the  lowest  rate  of  interest,  and  the  shortest 
period,  which  are  obtainable  in  so  critical  a  position.  We  can  hardly 
appreciate  the  change  in  that  position,  and  its  present  deplorable  char- 

*  A  speech  on  the  Loan  Bill;  delivered  in  the  United  States  Senate,  April  9,  1842. 


NATIONAL  FINANCES.  213 

acter,  unless  we  advert  to  our  situation  one  short  year  ago,  with  no 
permanent  debt  of  our  own,  with  a  small  temporary  one  of  only  five 
or  six  millions,  and  that  above  or  at  par,  with  a  reduced  and  reducing 
expenditure,  with  a  revenue  from  lands  and  customs  ample,  under 
slight  revisions  in  the  latter,  to  meet  such  an  expenditure,  and  extin- 
guish the  whole  debt,  and  with  a  national  credit  untarnished,  unde- 
preciated, and  unsuspected.  If,  more  in  sorrow  than  in  anger  or  in 
party  reproach,  we  contrast  that  lofty  position  with  what  now  stares 
us  in  the  face,  —  a  hideous  mass  of  large  permanent  debt,  and  a  still 
larger  temporary  one,  —  greatly  increased  expenditures,  depreciated 
stocks,  and  protest  on  protest  for  non-payment  of  ordinary  demands, 
as  well  as  temporary  loans,  —  our  hearts  must  recoil  at  the  sight. 
When  we  look  further,  and  see  the  whole  land  revenue  squandered, 
and  an  impossibility  of  getting  onward  in  such  a  ruinous  career  with- 
out further  disgrace,  further  acts  of  bankruptcy,  or  further  loans  at 
rank  usury,  it  all  admonishes  us  solemnly  that  something  wrong  must 
have  produced  such  disasters,  and  that  something  new  and  efficient 
must  be  adopted  to  remove  them.  Let  us  examine  the  subject,  then, 
in  a  manner  which  an  emergency  so  calamitous  demands,  rising,  for 
once,  above  party  or  the  mere  politics  of  the  day,  and  forgetting  every- 
thing but  what  is  required  of  us  as  statesmen,  patriots,  and  senators. 
I  shall,  therefore,  forbear  to  criminate  or  recriminate ;  and,  in  such  a 
condition  of  peril  to  the  country  and  its  high  character,  I  will  devote 
my  whole  efforts  to  discover  the  best  mode  of  relief,  through  a  loan, 
which  appears  to  comport  with  public  honor  and  public  safety,  and 
which,  at  the  same  time,  bids  fair  to  be  crowned  with  success. 

Hence,  I  am  willing  to  overlook  every  consideration  of  form  in  this 
bill,  and  every  subordinate  objection,  if  only  the  main  features  of  it 
can  be  made  such  as  are  most  likely  to  insure  a  creditable  escape 
from  present  ignominy.  I  say  nothing,  then,  as  to  the  extension  of 
the  time  for  a  year  or  two  within  which  the  loan  must  be  made,  if 
made  at  all.  Nor  will  I  be  captious  concerning  the  amount  which  the 
executive  is  authorized  to  borrow,  though  in  one  view  it  is  much  too 
large,  and  in  another  it  is  not  large  enough,  by  several  millions,  to 
carry  out  the  policy  now  in  force.  Nor  will  I  dwell  on  the  better 
reasons  which  exist  for  a  monthly  publication  of  what  is  done  under 
this  bill,  as  in  the  case  of  all  our  treasury  note  bills,  rather  than  a 
report  of  it  to  Congress  hereafter,  which,  of  course,  could  call  for  it 
without  this  provision.  Nor  am  I  tenacious  as  to  the  form  of  advertising 
and  of  accepting  offers,  though,  in  some  respects,  exceptionable.  Nor 
will  I  stop  to  expose  the  great  danger  of  issuing  certificates  virtually 
to  bearer,  and  also  in  sums  as  small  as  fifty  dollars,  or  fifty  cents,  and 
thus  open  the  door  to  infinite  difficulties  or  frauds,  and  forgeries,  in 
respect  to  the  payment  of  interest,  and  create  a  paper  circulation  not 
redeemable  at  all  for  twenty  years,  and  for  discharging  which  not 
even  the  one  dollar  of  specie  to  three  of  paper  is  required  to  be  kept, 
which  the  original  exchequer  project  provided  for. 


214  NATIONAL   FINANCES. 

Nor  will  I,  on  this  occasion,  so  pressing  and  momentous,  indulge 
even  in  reply,  at  any  length,  to  many  party  strictures,  made  in 
the  course  of  this  debate,  by  senators  on  the  other  side.  They  have 
been  such  as  to  swell  the  real  expenses  of  the  last  administration  to 
thirty-five  millions,  on  an  average,  yearly,  when  all  who  examine  with 
care  know  and  admit  them  to  have  been  but  twenty-seven  and  a  frac- 
tion ; — such  as  taunting  us  with  the  Florida  war,  when  our  opponents 
engaged  to  end  it  in  a  single  month,  but  have  not  yet  finished  it, 
though  more  than  a  year  has  elapsed;  and  such  as  asking  for  the  mon- 
uments over  the  country  of  our  expenses,  and  declaring  that  none  exist, 
when  all  the  civil,  foreign,  judicial,  legislative,  military  and  naval 
operations  of  the  country,  have  been  promptly  sustained ;  immense 
removals  of  Indians  made,  to  give  place  to  Christian  civilization ;  large 
pension  payments  continued  to  the  survivors  of  the  Revolution ; 
numerous  public  buildings  erected ;  arsenals,  armories,  barracks  and 
forts  built;  roads  extended,  rivers  and  harbors  in  many  cases  improved, 
and  peace  maintained,  in  a  most  perilous  crisis,  on  both  our  northern 
and  north-eastern,  as  well  as  south-western  frontiers. 

I  pass  by  much  more,  because  my  great  anxiety  is  to  discuss  only 
the  leading  principles  involved  in  the  amendment  to  the  bill,  and  in  the 
bill  itself. 

What,  then,  has  led  to  the  necessity  for  a  further  loan  bill,  in  any 
form  ?  For  tins  is  virtually  the  third  one  asked  within  the  last  eight 
months.  The  answer  to  this  will,  in  some  degree,  explain  the  pro- 
priety of  the  amendment,  and  the  best  mode  of  effecting  whatever  loan 
is  necessary. 

This  bill  is  wanted,  first,  for  the  residue  of  the  twelve  million  loan 
authorized  in  July  last,  because  that  loan,  to  the  amount  of  nearly  six 
millions,  had  utterly  failed,  even  before  this  session  commenced.  But 
the  act  of  July  permitted  six  per  cent,  interest  to  be  given,  if  no  lower 
terms  could  be  obtained  ;  it  run  for  only  three  years,  which  time,  the 
chairman  of  the  committee  (Mr.  Evans)  has  argued,  would  now 
insure  better  terms  in  the  market  than  a  longer  one.  It  pledged  the 
faith,  before  unsullied,  of  the  whole  Union,  for  the  prompt  payment  of 
both  its  interest  and  principal.  It  had  for  aid,  beside,  the  overwhelm- 
ing popularity  of  a  new  administration  ;  the  whole  financial  talent  of 
its  numerous  experienced  friends ;  the  boasted  superior  tact  which  was 
to  be  evinced  in  managing  our  magnificent  resources ;  —  yet,  in  less 
than  four  months,  it  utterly  failed,  and  the  treasury  soon  after  became 
protested,  the  national  faith  violated,  and  the  stock  is  now  selling  at  the 
discredited  discount  of  ninety-five  in  the  hundred.  This,  as  the  stock 
is  redeemable  in  two  or  three  years,  is  a  rate  of  interest  near  eight  per 
cent.,  being  the  only  instance  before  of  such  depreciation  in  our  credit 
in  time  of  peace,  since  the  government  went  fully  into  operation,  except 
in  the  deplorable  era  of  the  administration  of  the  elder  Adams. 

Let  my  friend  near  me,  then  (Mr.  Archer),  when  he  reflects  on 
these  facts,  not  flatter  himself  longer  that  the  proposed  loan,  as  the 


NATIONAL  FINANCES.  215 

bill  now  stands,  can  be  obtained  at  par.  Let  not  him,  or  others,  dream, 
in  such  a  prostration  of  our  credit,  that  the  greatness  of  the  nation, 
its  numerous  population,  its  immense  wealth,  its  past  glory,  will 
insure  success,  without  further  special  pledges  for  security,  or  addi- 
tional revenues  from  lands,  or  taxation  of  some  kind.  No,  sir.  All 
the  former,  and  more  than  these,  existed  under  the  bill  of  July ;  and 
yet,  —  wretched  delusion  and  disappointment !  —  the  loan  has  not  been 
effected,  and  our  national  faith  has  received  the  widest,  deepest,  dark- 
est stain  which  ever  branded  it  with  degradation  and  dishonor.  In 
short,  the  government  stands  before  Europe,  as  well  as  America,  both 
a  bankrupt  and  defaulter.  Let  us  look  at  these  astounding  facts,  and  at 
other  recent  experience  in  the  Union,  and  not  delude  ourselves  or  the 
country  with  abstract  reasoning  about  the  extent  of  our  resources, 
with  eloquent  eulogies  on  national  grandeur,  and  patriotic  hopes  of 
relief  from  mere  empty  promises.  Hard  will  it  be  for  these,  when 
already  so  faithless,  to  accomplish  what  our  own  senses  and  memory 
disprove,  and  what  the  history  of  all  nations  evinces  must,  in  such 
emergencies  in  peace,  be  derived  either  from  increased  means  or  dimin- 
ished wants,  and  perhaps,  at  the  same  time,  from  greater  skill  in  man- 
aging them,  and  wiser  counsels. 

There  is  another  striking  illustration  on  this  point,  in  the  other  part 
of  the  bill. 

"Why  is  the  additional  five  million  loan,  included  in  that,  wanted 
at  all  1 

"Would  it  be  needed  now,  if  you  were  able  to  succeed  in  borrowing 
money,  even  at  the  rate  of  six  per  cent.? — a  rate  high  for  us  in  peace, 
with  all  our  old  national  debt  extinguished.  No,  sir.  If  you  could 
have  effected  that,  by  all  your  greatness,  power,  resources,  glory,  and 
popularity  combined,  it  would,  up  to  this  time,  have  been  done  under 
the  last  treasury  note  bill,  or  under  the  former  permanent  loan  bill. 
Could  all  these  high  qualities  bring  the  money,  as  my  whig  friend, 
near  me,  seems  to  suppose,  then  why  has  it  not  come  ?  You  have  had 
those  qualities,  and  both  those  bills,  since  January  last;  but  you  have 
not  had  the  money. 

The  permanent  loan  having  sunk  impotently  in  your  hands,  though 
your  favorite  measure  in  contrast  with  the  system  of  treasury  notes, 
you  then  took  a  new  tack,  and,  soon  after  this  session  commenced, 
adopted  the  odious  and  denounced  issue  of  treasury  notes.  As  a  last 
resort,  rather  than  recall  the  lands,  you  took  to  your  embrace  a  sys- 
tem which  had  been  before  discarded  with  the  most  contemptuous  scoffs. 
You  hoped  it  might  prosper  and  keep  your  credit  at  par,  as  well  as 
it  had  accomplished  both  of  those  ends  under  the  preceding  adminis- 
tration. 

But  you  refused  to  sustain  it  with  any  additional  pledges  or  reve- 
nues, as  I  then  had  the  honor  to  propose  a  pledge  similar  to  this, 
under  a  conviction  that  in  a  state  of  discredit  like  the  present,  it  was 
judicious,  if  not  indispensable.     You  relied,  as  you  argue  now,  only 


216  NATIONAL   FINANCES. 

on  great  national  wealth,  great  national  resources,  and  your  great 
financial  skill. 

What  has  been  the  mortifying  result  ?  In  less  than  three  months, 
even  this  excellent  resource  for  an  emergency,  if  properly  guarded  and 
properly  conducted,  failed  entirely  in  your  hands.  The  credit  of  your 
notes  has  sunk  as  low,  at  times,  as  three  to  four  per  cent,  below  par  ; 
your  public  interest  and  public  debt  in  these  very  notes  have  remained 
unpaid  and  protested ;  your  public  faith  to  contractors  and  officers 
broken,  and  your  treasury  subject  to  take  the  benefit  of  your  new 
bankrupt  system  over  and  over  again,  if  the  same  forms  could  be 
applied  to  it  as  to  an  individual.  Yet,  after  all  these  loads  of  finan- 
cial disgrace,  we  hear  eloquent  appeals  to  run  again  the  round  of 
mere  hollow  and  fallacious  promises ;  we  hear  exhortations  to  put 
another  bill  into  the  market  for  other  loans,  instead  of  these  discredited 
ones,  with  no  new  revenues  pledged  or  raised  to  sustain  it,  and  no 
new  policy  adopted.  And  confidence — yes,  sir,  senatorial  confidence — 
is  asked,  that  it  can  thus  be  obtained  at  par  or  nearly  at  par,  in  despite 
of  all  argument,  experience  and  analogy.  You  could  get  something 
for  the  stock;  but  can  you  get  what  it  is  creditable  to  receive,  or  honest 
for  our  constituents  to  sanction  1  In  this  emergency,  then,  something 
more  must  be  done,  on  our  part,  to  obtain  such  terms  as  are  reasonable 
and  just,  and  to  pluck  up  drowning  honor  by  the  locks,  or  it  is  lost 
forever.  Experience  proves  this.  Some  of  the  terms  of  the  bill  itself 
prove  it.  The  state  of  the  country,  the  treasury  and  the  administra- 
tion, prove  it.  What,  then,  is  that  something  more  ?  Manifestly,  to 
remove  the  cause  or  necessity  for  the  whole  or  a  part  of  the  loan,  if  it 
be  practicable,  consistent  with  public  faith  and  public  duty.  If  it  be 
not,  then,  in  the  next  place,  to  increase  the  security  and  success  of  such 
a  loan  as  is  indispensable,  so  as  to  obtain  it  on  the  best  possible  terms 
which  are  within  our  power,  and  are  proper  under  all  the  unfortunate 
circumstances  of  the  treasury.  The  real  cause  of  the  loan  lies  deeper 
than  the  mere  failure  of  the  last  treasury  note  bill,  or  of  the  last  loan 
bill.  It  is  this  :  The  past  administration  yearly  reduced  its  expenses, 
for  reasons  explained  on  former  occasions,  but  which  need  not  now  be 
repeated,  till,  in  1840,  they  were  only  twenty-two  millions  and  a  half 
of  dollars.  It  sent  in  estimates,  and  determined  to  bring  them  down, 
in  1841,  to  less  than  twenty  millions ;  and  proposed  a  further  deduc- 
tion, in  1842,  to  about  eighteen  millions.  Now,  the  present  adminis- 
tration, instead  of  keeping  down  the  expenses,  in  1841,  to  less  than 
twenty  millions,  or  even  as  low  as  the  twenty-two  and  a  half  of  1840, 
unfurled  at  once  every  sail,  crowded  every  kind  of  expense,  called  a 
costly  extra  session,  made  millions  of  new  appropriations,  and  thus 
swelled  the  expenditures  for  1841  to  more  than  twenty-five  millions. 
In  this  way  a  necessity  was  caused  for  more  than  five  millions  of  the 
proposed  loan.  Again :  this  year  the  same  administration  contem- 
plates an  expenditure  of  more  than  twenty-six  millions,  being  eight 


NATIONAL  FINANCES.  217 

more  than  what  was  proposed  by  the  past  administration.  These 
together  have  created  a  necessity  for  thirteen  millions  of  loan. 

But  above  and  beyond  all  this,  the  present  administration  omitted 
last  year  to  advertise  and  sell  the  public  lands  in  the  usual  manner 
after  the  4th  of  March,  and  thus  lessened  the  receipts  from  them 
probably  quite  two  millions.  It  next  gave  away,  for  this  year,  the 
whole  of  the  receipts  from  that  source,  which,  if  the  lands  were  adver- 
tised as  fully  as  usual,  would  equal  three  millions ;  and  thus,  as  to 
the  lands  in  both  years,  created  a  necessity  for  a  loan  of  five  millions 
more. 

All  these  united  make  eighteen  millions,  or  equal  to  the  whole 
amount  embraced  in  this  and  the  July  loan  bills,  and  one  million  of 
what  is  in  the  treasury  note  bill  of  last  January. 

The  whole  case,  then,  lies  within  the  span  of  your  hand.  If  wo 
could  now  retrace  our  steps,  and  incur  no  more  expense  in  1841  and 
1842  than  was  contemplated  by  the  past  administration,  and  advertise 
and  retain  the  proceeds  of  the  lands,  as  that  administration  proposed, 
we  could  at  once  remove  any  cause  for  a  single  dollar  of  the  present 
loan,  and  could  redeem  all  of  the  twelve  millions  of  July  last,  which 
has  already  been  borrowed.  But  I  admit  that  the  whole  of  this  is  not 
now  in  our  power.  "What  is  past  is  gone  forever,  and  we  must  submit 
to  the  loss.  What  is  to  come,  however,  is  yet  under  our  control. 
This  includes  most  of  the  expenses  of  the  present  year,  as  few  of  the 
new  appropriations  have  passed,  and  includes,  also,  most  of  the  sales 
of  the  public  lands. 

It  is,  then,  manifest  that,  if  the  old  appropriations  are  now  so  post- 
poned, and  the  new  ones  so  reduced,  as  to  require,  in  1842,  but 
eighteen  or  nineteen  millions  expenditure,  which  is  practicable  without 
essential  injury  to  the  public  interest  (as  shown  fully  on  a  former 
occasion),  and  if  the  distribution  of  the  proceeds  of  the  public  lands  is 
suspended  or  repealed,  and  those  ready  for  the  market  are  seasonably 
advertised  in  the  accustomed  manner,  it  will  make  a  difference  in 
expense  of  seven  to  eight  millions,  and  in  receipts  of  three  to  four 
millions ;  and,  thus  united,  supersede  the  necessity  of  any  part  of  the 
loan  included  in  the  present  bill,  with  a  view  solely  to  defray  our 
expenses.  This  is  the  whole  case  in  a  nutshell.  But  some  gentlemen 
refuse  to  postpone  or  retrench  so  much.  Others  may  refuse  to  recall 
the  lands  for  this  purpose.  And  others  still,  if  the  retrenchment  or 
repeal  of  the  distribution  is  intended  hereafter,  are  not  yet  willing  to 
do  either.  And  others  may  wish  the  loan  accomplished,  in  order  to 
redeem  and  fund  at  once  all  the  treasury  notes  out,  and  answer  the 
present  emergency  a  few  weeks,  though  not  needed  to  cover  the  cur- 
rent expenses,  if  they  are  properly  reduced.  I  say,  then,  to  all  such, 
that  if  the  distribution  of  the  lands  is  ever  to  be  suspended  or  repealed, 
this  is  the  accepted  time.  If  not  done  by  an  amendment  to  this  bill, 
it  will  come  too  late  for  accomplishing  all  its  natural  benefits,  and  will 
leave  your  public  credit  to  be  blown  upon,  blasted  and  sunk,  more  to 
19 


218  NATIONAL  FINANCES. 

the  injury  of  the  States  separately,  as  well  as  collectively,  than  the 
value  of  all  these  lands  to  the  end  of  time. 

Why  do  I  say  this  ?  Not  for  declamation,  sir,  but  from  a  solemn 
conviction  that,  if  without  that  suspension  or  repeal,  and  without 
retrenchment,  as  well  as  without  the  previous  imposition  of  a  dollar 
of  new  tax  of  any  kind  or  in  any  way,  you  go  into  the  market,  with 
the  provisions  of  this  bill,  to  sell  the  stock  at  any  sacrifice,  and  for  a 
period  of  twenty  years,  your  conduct  will  lead  to  the  loss  of  more 
than  three  millions  of  dollars  on  this  loan  alone.  It  will  also  be  hung 
up  to  reprobation,  not  only  by  those  who  are  now  to  suffer  as  to  the 
interest  from  such  improvidence,  but  by  a  succeeding  generation,  who 
are  to  suffer  still  more  as  to  the  principal,  by  refunding  millions  which 
neither  they  nor  the  government  ever  received.  If  any  usury,  extor- 
tion, or  waste,  could  justify  repudiation,  or  tempt  to  it,  such  conduct 
has  a  powerful  tendency  that  way;  though,  absolutely  and  sin- 
cerely, I  abhor  everything  like  repudiation  of  debt,  whether  in  public 
or  private  life.  I  am  a  debt-paying  man.  I  belong  to  a  debt-paying 
race.  I  represent  a  debt-paying  State ;  and,  thank  God,  no  native  or 
foreigner  can  obtain  its  scrip  or  bonds  under  par,  or  even  above  par, — 
for  not  a  dollar  of  them  exists,  or  ever  has  existed,  of  a  permanent 
character,  under  its  present  form  of  government. 

Let  us  see  how  this  matter  stands,  as  to  the  analogies  and  examples 
around  us  at  the  present  moment,  when  we  are  forced  into  the  market 
with  a  loan  bill  so  exceedingly  loose,  and  dangerous,  and  unprece- 
dented in  its  provisions.  Some  senators  seem  to  forget  the  change,  in 
the  times  and  character  of  the  country,  on  the  subject  of  a  public  debt. 
It  is  no  longer  a  matter  of  theory  and  conjecture,  that  the  obligation  of 
contracts  will  never  here  be  impaired,  and  the  debts  of  individuals, — 
the  sacred  loans  to  them, —  never  be  sponged  out  by  a  retrospective 
bankrupt  law,  and  one,  too,  made  avowedly  to  release  the  debtor  for- 
ever, rather  than  benefit  the  creditor.  Nor  is  it  any  longer  a  matter 
of  doubt,  denial,  and  abhorrence,  that  even  States  themselves,  the 
American  States,  can  ever  fail  or  refuse  to  pay  the  sacred  loans  to 
them  punctually.  The  borrowers  have  had  plighted  faith,  public 
morality,  constitutional  duty,  ability  in  population  and  wealth,  all  con- 
secrated originally  to  discharge  the  interest  and  redeem  the  principal 
promptly ;  and  yet  has  it  been  done  ?  Have  not  these  borrowers  been 
obliged,  in  many  cases,  to  sell  the  evidence  of  these  loans  sometimes 
for  eighteen  cents  on  the  dollar,  and  in  others  for  thirty  and  sixty 
cents  only,  on  some  of  the  largest  States  in  the  Union  ?  And  yet,  are 
we  so  purblind  and  inconsiderate  as  not  to  see  the  inevitable  conse- 
quence of  all  this  ?  If  not,  can  we  suppose  that  these  same  capitalists 
and  brokers,  whether  here  or  abroad,  who  have  just  been  so  sadly 
plundered,  will  rush  forward  and  lend  more  to  us,  at  a  much  less  sac- 
rifice or  depreciation,  on  the  same  plighted  faith  only, — on  the  same 
public  morality,  population,  wealth,  and  duty  only  ?  The  borrowers 
have  nothing  more  to  rely  on  yet, — the  firm  is  no  richer  than  all  the 


NATIONAL   FINANCES.  219 

separate  partners.  The  ability  of  the  whole,  in  their  mere  population 
and  resources,  is  no  more  certain,  to  the  extent  of  this  loan,  than  that 
of  many  of  the  separate  indebted  States.  But  in  these  times  it  has 
turned  out,  as  has  been  predicted  in  all  former  times,  and  realized  in 
many  instances,  that  promises  with  actual  collateral  security  of  lands 
and  taxes,  or  other  revenue  sufficient  to  meet  loans  and  current 
expenses,  are  infinitely  better  and  quicker  in  the  market  than  promises 
without  such  security.  This  is  the  case  with  individuals ;  and  most 
emphatically  is  it  so  with  governments,  with  States,  and  confederacies. 
Hence,  those  States  that  have  actually  imposed  taxes,  or  possess  other 
resources  equal  to  the  payment  of  their  current  expenses  and  interest 
on  their  loans,  are  not  discredited  at  all,  or  but  slightly ;  while  others, 
without  such  existing  income,  or  any  other  collateral  pledge,  are  pro- 
tested, and  their  bonds  scorned.  Even  while  this  debate  is  going  on, 
the  bonds  of  the  great  State  of  Pennsylvania,  before  sunk  below  fifty 
cents  on  a  dollar  (because  without  any  adequate  pledge  to  redeem 
them),  have  fallen,  in  a  single  day,  five  dollars  more  on  the  hundred, 
in  consequence  of  her  legislature  having  just  adjourned  for  two  months, 
without  raising  a  sufficient  revenue  to  discharge  her  current  expenses 
and  interest. 

But  why  dwell  longer  on  analogies  ?  Where  are  our  own  bonds  or 
scrip,  issued  in  July  last  ?  Where  are  our  own  treasury  notes,  issued 
since  January  last?  Depeciated,  hawked  about  at  a  discount,  pro- 
tested, and  refused  for  payment  by  every  public  claimant  who  has  any 
prospect  of  obtaining  anything  better.  In  this  deplorable  condition, 
we  are  urged  to  pass  this  bill  speedily  to  remedy  the  evil ;  and  yet,  are 
sending  this  new  scrip  into  the  market,  without  raising  first  a  dollar 
more  of  revenue  in  any  shape,  of  tariff  or  taxes,  to  meet  the  interest 
of  our  expenses ;  without  taking  back  the  proceeds  of  the  lands  to 
assist  in  this  essential  duty ;  without  material  retrenchment  of  any 
kind ;  with  seventeen  millions  of  permanent  debt  thus  authorized,  and 
the  certainty  of  five  or  six  more  before  we  adjourn,  if  the  present  pol- 
icy is  persisted  in ;  and,  in  fine,  with  an  increase  now  accruing,  lagging 
far  behind  our  burdens,  and  not  equal  to  our  contemplated  expense 
into  about  ten  millions  a  year. 

Look,  a  moment,  at  this  last  attraction  to  confidence.  See  how  it 
has  turned  out  with  States  conducting  in  a  similar  infatuated  manner. 
See  how  it  has  turned  out  with  ourselves  thus  far, — giving  away 
great  revenues  when  we  are  obliged  to  borrow,  increasing  greatly  our 
expenses  when  we  ought  to  reduce  them,  and  asking  more  confidence 
and  more  loans  after  we  have  already  failed,  and  without  raising  or 
pledging  a  dollar  that  did  not  exist  when  the  failure  occurred. 

It  is  true  that  this  bill  does  what  the  bill  of  last  July  did  not,  by 
making  a  pledge  of  the  customs  generally  to  meet  this  loan,  and  thus 
recognizing  the  utility  of  some  kind  of  pledges.  But  the  misfortune 
in  this  is,  it  pledges  nothing  new,  nothing  additional,  nothing  which 
did  not  exist,  and  would  not  exist,  to  be  applied  to  the  debt,  perhaps 


220  NATIONAL   FINANCES. 

as  faithfully  without  the  pledge  as  with  it,  though  not  with  a  like 
assurance  and  certainty  as  regards  the  creditor.  But  the  pledge  of 
the  lands,  contained  in  this  amendment,  would,  on  the  contrary,  be 
three  to  four  millions  a  year  of  new  means,  new  revenue,  new  ability : 
means,  too,  in  our  own  possession  and  control,  and  not  contingent  or 
uncertain  like  a  loan;  means,  also,  voluntary,  and  not  extorted  by 
taxes,  and  hence  doubtful,  and  often  delayed;  means  coming  in 
weekly  and  monthly,  as  wanted,  and  where  wanted;  means  which 
we  have  always  used,  from  the  foundation  of  the  government,  and  the 
parting  with  which  last  summer,  under  all  the  circumstances  of  the 
case,  has  been  one  of  the  most  fatal  stabs  to  our  credit,  our  financial 
character,  and  national  honor,  which  it  was  in  human  power  to  inflict. 

Gentlemen  have  misapprehended  the  whole  scope  of  this  amend- 
ment, and  the  advantages  to  this  loan  in  a  repeal  of  the  distribution, 
by  regarding  it  as  a  mere  question  of  pledging  or  not  pledging  to  a 
creditor,  in  a  collateral  form,  what  you  already  possess,  and  are  bound, 
in  good  faith,  if  able,  to  apply  to  his  payment,  without  a  specific 
pledge. 

In  the  vacillation  and  uncertainty  of  legislation,  and  the  distresses 
of  the  times,  as  well  as  in  the  constant  occurrence  of  deficiency  in 
means,  it  would  clearly  be  useful  to  any  particular  creditor  to  have  a 
priority  or  preference  in  the  revenue,  or  some  important  branch  of  it, 
doing  much  service  in  case  of  a  deficit ;  and  the  only  mode  of  effecting 
this  is  by  giving  him  a  previous  specific,  tangible,  collateral  pledge 
of  a  part  of  it,  as  is  proposed  in  this  amendment. 

But  it  would  be  infinitely  more  useful,  in  other  views  connected 
with  this  loan,  to  repeal  the  distribution,  not  merely  to  use  it  as  a 
pledge,  but  so  as  to  add  three  or  four  millions  more  to  our  certain  and 
permanent  income, — so  as  to  reduce  the  necessity  of  so  large  a  loan,  no 
less  than  the  difficulty  and  sacrifices  in  effecting  it,  and  so  as  to 
increase  our  ability,  and,  of  course,  our  credit,  to  a  like  extent,  to  meet 
all  our  public  engagements,  whether  of  debts  or  otherwise. 

Let  us  look,  a  moment,  at  these  objects  separately. 

1.  With  those  considering  an  actual  pledge  either  conducive  to 
success  or  success  on  better  terms,  the  lands  present  a  large  and 
valuable  auxiliary. 

The  House  of  Representatives  have,  by  this  bill,  shown  their  con- 
fidence in  a  pledge,  by  including  the  customs.  If  they  (the  customs) 
are  useful,  so  would  be  the  lands.  If  they  will  help  to  reduce  the 
interest  on  the  discount,  so  will  the  lands.  The  President,  also,  has 
recommended  a  suspension  or  repeal,  evidently  to  aid  the  loan  by  a 
pledge,  as  well  as  for  other  purposes.  Our  past  history  is  also  full  of 
evidence  that  a  pledge  of  these  very  lands  has  been  deemed"  useful  in 
securing  loans.  They  were  pledged  in  the  very  first  funding  and 
loan  bill  under  the  constitution,  as  has  been  often  stated  before  at  this 
session.  But,  more  than  this,  they  remained  pledged  till  the  Revolu- 
tionary debt  was  extinguished,  as  late  as  1835.     This  is  the  reason 


NATIONAL  FINANCES.  221 

why  the  pledge  of  them  was  not  repeated  during  the  late  war,  while 
old  taxes,  new  taxes,  and  the  sinking  fund,  were  all  pledged  over  and 
over  again.  The  lands  had  been  already  consecrated  to  pay  a  part  of 
the  price  of  our  liberties.  But  we,  like  Americans  and  honest  men, 
gave  everything  else  as  security  for  our  public  faith,  in  the  second 
great  struggle  with  our  ancient  oppressors;  and  nobly  have  we 
redeemed  those  promises.  The  security  was  not  confined,  as  the 
chairman  supposed  (Mr.  Evans),  to  a  stipulation  to  raise  more  taxes, 
but  it  was  extended  to  the  whole  sinking  fund  of  eight  millions, 
and  new  taxes  raised,  direct  and  internal.  The  whole  were  dedicated 
to  this  sacred  object.  They  went  so  far  as  to  engage  not  even  after 
peace  to  repeal  the  latter,  unless  substituting  something  else  as 
valuable.     (Sect.  5,  of  act  of  Dec.  23,  1814.) 

Such  a  course  as  this  pursued  in  1789  and  1814,  instead  of  being 
degrading,  derogatory  or  humiliating,  was,  on  the  contrary,  honest, 
truthful,  manly,  honorable  for  a  debtor,  —  American  in  duty,  and 
Anglo-Saxon  in  feeling.  Remember  that  we  are  asking  favors,  not 
conferring  them ;  dependent  on  our  creditors  for  money  and  indul- 
gence, far  should  it  be  from  us  to  ill-treat,  or  trifle  with,  or  leave 
them  insecure.  England  always  pledged  new  taxes  for  her  loans,  till, 
as  gentlemen  have  explained,  they  could,  from  the  size  of  her  debt,  be 
of  no  avail.  Such  a  pledge  secured  the  very  debt  on  which  the  Bank 
of  England  itself  rested  in  its  origin.  And  when  governments  are  dis- 
credited in  the  stock-market,  and  become  beggars  for  loans,  they  must 
not  assume  a  lofty  port,  and  be  choosers  of  their  terms,  but  give  usual 
security  and  usual  certainty,  if  expecting  success  within  any  reason- 
able sacrifice.  To  be  sure,  we  are  not  torn  by  internal  dissensions  so 
much  as  Spain,  notwithstanding  what  is  occurring  in  one  of  the  States 
(Rhode  Island)  in  a  struggle  for  popular  rights ;  yet  we  are  in  a  con- 
dition of  great  pecuniary  discredit,  and  must  expect  to  be  asked  for 
ample  security.  Spain  has  had  to  place  the  Rothschilds  in  the  receipt 
of  the  income  of  her  quicksilver  mines,  for  their  security.  Even  the 
revenues  of  Cuba  have  been  talked  of  as  a  pledge,  placed  under  the 
control  of  some  third  power,  for  the  safety  of  still  further  loans.  And 
is  it  unworthy  for  us  to  pledge  our  own  lands,  won  by  the  valor  of  our 
forefathers,  and  pledged  by  their  honesty  and  fidelity  to  their  obliga- 
tions, and  which,  parted  with,  instead  of  pledged,  during  the  last  half- 
year,  have  been  a  fruitful  source  of  all  our  present  pecuniary  woes  ? 
Such  a  pledge  has  likewise  been  most  strenuously  advocated  by  the 
great  founder  of  American  finance ;  and,  in  his  second  report  on  public 
credit,  in  1795,  he  enforced  it  as  always  judicious,  by  reasons  the  most 
irresistible.  Are  we  wiser,  in  these  matters,  than  Hamilton?  Is  it 
disreputable  for  us  to  do,  in  matters  like  these,  what  such  men  as  he, 
and  Madison,  and  Washington,  approved  1  Is  it  degradation  to  follow 
in  their  footsteps,  or  to  seek  to  secure  well  and  pay  promptly  all  that 
we  owe  1  There  is  a  lurking  conviction  in  the  bill,  as  it  comes  to  us, 
that  a  pledge  is  useful, — or  why  are  the  customs  pledged  1  There  is 
19* 


222  NATIONAL   FINANCES. 

such  a  conviction  -with  the  executive  also,  or  why  has  he  recommended 
the  suspension  of  the  distribution  to  aid  the  loan  1 

Is  the  Senate  alone  to  disavow,  repudiate  and  disparage,  such  opin- 
ions ?  And  are  we  alone  to  regard  it  as  dishonor  to  take  a  usual  and 
effectual  step  to  prevent  dishonor  1  But  it  may  be  believed  by  some, 
here  and  elsewhere,  that  though  a  suspension  or  repeal  of  the  distribu- 
tion is  proper  in  this  emergency,  yet  it  is  not  required  to  be  made  in 
this  bill,  in  the  form  of  a  pledge  of  the  proceeds,  but  may  be  made  in 
a  separate  bill,  after  this  passes,  or  in  a  bill  raising  the  tariff  above 
twenty  per  cent.  Such,  I  understand,  is  the  view  of  my  friend  from 
Virginia  (Mr.  Archer).  Now,  sir,  let  me  conjure  such  gentlemen 
to  reflect  whether  a  suspension  or  repeal,  in  the  present  form  and  at 
the  present  moment,  would  not  have  a  double  advantage ;  as  it  would 
not  only  render  the  loan  more  secure,  and  hence  obtainable  on  better 
terms,  but  it  would,  if  done  now,  show  at  once  to  the  monied  world 
that  we  would  not  be  obliged  to  borrow  so  much  by  three  or  four  mil- 
lions. In  that  view,  we  should  certainly  be  more  likely  to  procure 
what  we  wanted,  and  at  lower  terms ;  as  it  would  be  seen  by  all  that 
our  necessities  had  become  less,  and  our  means  greater. 

But,  if  the  suspension  does  not  take  place  in  this  bill,  or  before  it  is 
flung  upon  the  world,  the  suspension  is  not  certain,  and  can  have  no 
influence  whatever  in  procuring  this  loan.  If  it  is,  therefore,  ever  to 
be  suspended  or  repealed, — whether  formally  pledged  or  not, — this  is 
infinitely  the  better  time. 

2.  Again :  whether  pledged  or  not,  the  suspension  now  will  con- 
vince the  world  that  we  actually  possess,  and  not  merely  hope  to  raise, 
three  or  four  millions  more,  to  aid  in  paying  the  interest  and  principal 
of  this  loan,  with  our  other  large  expenses.  That  alone,  independent 
of  the  pledge,  is  a  most  conclusive  argument  in  favor  of  doing  it  now, 
before  the  loan  is  thrust  into  the  market. 

In  this  view,  the  pledge  of  the  customs,  already  in  the  bill,  is 
without  value.  It  is  nothing  of  revenue,  or  ability,  or  means,  which 
is  new  and  additional,  like  the  land  recalled.  It  is  merely  transferring 
from  one  box  or  column  the  same  sum  to  another  box  or  column,  but 
adds  not  a  dollar  to  our  ability.  It  is  only  a  new  promise  to  strengthen 
an  old  one ;  or  paying  an  old  broken  promise  by  an  empty  new  one  of 
similar  character. 

All  know,  and  feel,  and  admit,  that  we  have  failed  to  get  the  money, 
without  the  possession  of  the  land  revenue.  Why,  then,  will  not  all 
now  restore  it,  in  order  to  see  whether  we  may  not  be  able,  as  we  for- 
merly were,  to  obtain  loans  readily,  not  only  for  six  per  cent.,  but  five 
and  four  and  a  half,  and  that  for  short  terms,  instead  of  the  long  and 
losing  one  of  twenty  years.  The  probable  revenue  from  these  lands 
would  alone  pay  six  per  cent,  interest  on  a  loan  of  fifty  millions  of 
dollars,  and  would  extinguish,  in  four  or  five  years,  the  whole  principal; 
as  well  as  interest,  of  this  proposed  loan. 

If,  as  the  senator  near  me  (Mr.  Archer)  asserted,  the  treasury  is 


NATIONAL  FINANCES.  223 

now  arid  as  a  sand-bank,  by  the  sirocco  misrule  of  the  past 
administration,  —  if  he  really  believe  this,  when  we  left  it  in  high 
credit,  its  notes  at  par,  and  all  its  debts  punctually  paid, — why  was  it 
made  more  bare  by  the  acts  of  this  administration  last  summer,  giving 
away  three  millions  of  our  former  revenue,  and  increasing  expenses 
four  or  five  millions  a  year  ?  And  when  the  nakedness  is  now  dis- 
closed to  every  eye, — however  shameful  and  however  produced, — why 
will  he  not  join  with  us  in  restoring  what  the  treasury  has  been 
stripped  of?  And  why  will  he  not  do  it  now,  forthwith,  when  most 
needed,  and  when  its  possession  will  save  millions  to  the  country  in 
credit  and  capital  ?  I  appeal  to  his  patriotism  and  judgment,  as  well 
as  his  common  sense,  about  this,  against  his  preconceived  opinions  or 
sudden  impulses. 

3.  This  view  of  the  subject  goes  far  deeper,  wider,  higher,  than  the 
question  of  mere  collateral  security.  It  involves  an  addition  or 
increase  of  one-fifth  to  our  whole  present  revenue.  It  is,  in  part, 
accomplished  forthwith. 

It  so  far  relieves  the  banks  from  danger  of  suspension,  by  having 
their  deposites  withdrawn  so  largely  by  capitalists  taking  the  loan. 

It  leaves  more  money  to  be  loaned  to  merchants  and  others,  as  well 
as  exempts  them  more  from  forced  collections  by  banks  and  capitalists 
to  procure  money  to  invest  in  the  loan.  It  also  injures  less  the  pres- 
ent stockholders,  and  less  defeats  all  the  hopes  of  other  borrowers. 

Once  more :  it  does  not  depend,  like  other  resources,  on  future  legis- 
lation or  future  imports,  or  the  chances  of  trade  and  consumption.  It 
has  not  the  delay  and  uncertainty  even  of  a  loan,  which  will  require,  if 
abroad,  at  least  three  months;  but  it  is  tangible,  specific,  present, 
accessible.  Some  of  the  money  is  now  in  hand,  the  rest  coming  in  daily, 
as  wanted  and  where  wanted.  It  does  not  increase  the  burdens  or 
distresses  of  the  people,  as  future  taxes  instead  of  it  may,  but  is  paid 
voluntarily,  and  for  substance  in  return.  All  this,  and  much  more  of 
weight,  goes  out  to  the  community  with  this  very  bill,  and  has  an 
electrical  effect  in  inspiring  confidence  in  your  increased  ability,  as  well 
as  increased  prudence.  People  see  and  feel  that  you  are  resorting  to  a 
natural  source  of  relief,  and  not  a  harsh,  oppressing  and  doubtful  one, 
in  imposing  still  greater  taxes  on  those  now  so  broken  down.  It  is 
an  immemorial  and  accustomed  source  of  supply  in  all  our  history,  — 
an  inexhaustible  and  rich  one,  if  not  squandered,  and  one  which  has 
helped,  and  always  should  help,  to  defray  the  great  expenses  which 
have  alone  rendered  the  lands  valuable,  such  as  the  war  for  our  inde- 
pendence, the  Indian  wars  since  and  hereafter,  the  extinguishment  of 
Indian  titles,  all  our  Indian  annuities,  and  the  whole  system  of  civil 
government  which  insures  sales,  safety,  cultivation,  wealth,  liberty  and 
happiness,  in  connection  with  the  national  domain. 

Nor  is  the  repeal  contemplated  in  this  amendment  proposed  merely 
to  aid  in  discharging  interest,  leaving  the  residue  of  the  proceeds  of 
the  public  lands  to  lie  idle  or  be  wasted,  as  the  senator  from  Ken- 


224  NATIONAL  FINANCES. 

tucky  (Mr.  Crittenden)  seemed  to  suppose.  It  is  expressly  applied 
to  redeem  the  principal,  as  well  as  interest ;  and  the  act  to  which  this 
is  an  addition  provides  expressly  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury, 
whenever  having  funds,  shall  purchase  in  the  stock  itself.  Such  is 
virtually  the  resolution  offered  the  other  day,  by  the  senator  from  Vir- 
ginia (Mr.  Rives),  and  such  is  the  substance  of  the  President's  recent 
message,  recommending  a  suspension. 

In  respect  to  that  message,  I  do  not  hesitate  to  speak  with  frank- 
ness, though  in  praise  of  a  political  opponent.  Considering  that  the 
chief  magistrate  so  recently  signed  the  distribution  bill,  and  with  what 
favor  it  is  regarded  by  most  of  his  party,  and  with  what  death-like 
tenacity  it  is  adhered  to,  I  consider  his  recommendation  to  suspend  its 
operation  during  the  present  emergency  as  evincing  much  good  sense, 
elevated  devotion  to  duty  over  party  feeling,  and  no  little  degree  of 
magnanimity.  I  am  no  partisan  nor  eulogist  of  those  in  power ;  but 
I  can  appreciate  fully  the  obstacles  to  such  a  lofty  course,  and  can  do 
justice  to  this  particular  act,  even  in  an  opponent,  however  much  I 
regret  and  disapprove  many  other  measures  of  his  administration. 

Nor  can  I  forbear  to  add,  in  favor  of  this  recommendation  and  of 
the  amendment  now  under  consideration,  that  they  seem  to  me  in  strict 
accordance  with  the  original  idea  of  a  distribution  of  the  proceeds  of 
the  public  lands. 

The  author  of  the  project  (Mr.  Clay)  expressly  and  repeatedly 
repudiated  the  idea  of  any  distribution  except  of  a  surplus.  But  now, 
whatever  may  have  been  expected  last  summer,  no  surplus  is  pretended 
to  exist,  or  is  likely  to  exist.  He  also  disclaimed,  and  has  reprobated 
at  this  very  session,  the  idea  of  a  distribution  of  any  money  raised  by 
taxes. 

Yet  it  is  demonstrable  that,  to  the  full  extent  of  this  distribution, 
and,  most  think,  to  a  much  greater  extent,  taxes  must  be  imposed,  if 
it  takes  place ;  and  what  difference  does  it  make  to  the  community 
whether  the  taxes  are  imposed  for  the  purpose  of  distribution,  or  as  the 
inevitable  consequence  of  distribution  ?  The  author  of  it  also  voted, 
at  the  last  session,  for  a  distribution  which  was  to  be  suspended  the 
moment  duties  were  imposed  above  twenty  per  cent.  He  thus  vir- 
tually stipulated,  as  far  as  he  or  the  law  could,  that  the  distribution 
should  then  stop.  The  bill,  it  is  well  known,  could  not  have  passed 
without  such  a  stipulation.  What,  then,  becomes  of  the  propriety, 
courtesy,  duty,  of  seeking  now  to  violate  that  stipulation  ?  And  if  it 
is  not  to  be  violated,  and  the  duties  are  to  be  raised  above  twenty  per 
cent.,  as  our  opponents  insist,  then  does  it  not  comport  with  the  spirit, 
as  well  as  the  letter,  of  the  distribution  act,  to  suspend  it ;  and  if  to 
suspend  it  soon,  then  to  do  it  at  once,  rather  than  some  months  hence  ? 
Now  it  will  accomplish  two  great  objects,  rather  than  one,  as  it  will 
aid  greatly  in  effecting  a  favorable  loan,  which  it  could  not  do  unless 
now.  In  other  words,  the  original  gift  of  the  lands  was,  by  its  express 
terms,  to  revert  on  contingencies  which  have  substantially  happened. 


NATIONAL   FINANCES.  225 

The  amendment  is,  then,  substantially  abiding  by  the  original  principles 
of  the  distribution,  as  well  as  the  act  itself,  instead  of  being  a  wanton 
violation  of  them.  It  is  also  pursuing  a  really  stable,  rather  than 
fickle  policy.  It  is  truthful,  honest,  safe,  prudent,  profitable ;  and,  in 
every  view,  to  my  mind,  deserving  the  support  of  even  those  who  voted 
for  the  act  of  distribution  itself,  on  any  fixed  principles  similar  to  those 
avowed  by  its  author. 

But  there  is  another  question  connected  with  the  repeal  proposed  in 
this  amendment,  about  which  I  offered  some  views  to  the  Senate  on  a 
former  occasion,  and  which  the  senator  from  Virginia,  opposite  (Mr. 
Rives),  has  urged  in  this  debate.  It  is  of  a  very  grave  character,  and 
involves  an  alternative  no  less  momentous  than  this  repeal  of  the  distri- 
bution, or  a  probable  necessity  to  resort  to  direct  taxes.  Your  plan  is 
to  raise  at  least  twenty-six  millions  a  year  by  the  tariff.  If  you  recall 
the  lands,  you  need  not  raise  but  twenty- three ;  and  if  you  retrench 
properly  beside,  you  need  not  raise  twenty  millions  by  a  tariff.  These 
last  you  might  get ;  but  how  are  these  twenty-six  millions  to  be  obtained 
from  a  tariff  in  times  like  the  present?  —  times  embarrassed  beyond 
precedent ;  no  State  loans  abroad  to  come  home  in  goods ;  no  credit,  but 
cash  payments,  and  those  in  specie,  or  its  equivalent,  instead  of  depre- 
ciated paper ;  and  a  new  bankrupt  bill  in  force,  for  debtors  rather  than 
creditors,  and  thus  breaking  up  all  trust  from  abroad  to  the  importer, 
as  well  as  from  the  importer  to  the  retailer,  and  from  the  retailer  to  the 
farmer,  mechanic,  and  laborer.  Who  will  be  so  greedy  to  obtain  here- 
after mere  promises,  hollow  promises  to  pay  for  merchandise,  which 
may  all  at  any  moment  be  sponged  out,  and  the  destructive  process 
repeated  a  hundred  times,  if  necessary,  through  all  classes  of  the  com- 
munity 1 

Let  us  examine  this  a  little  in  detail.  The  chairman  expects  now 
to  obtain  from  duties  under  the  present  laws,  accruing  in  1842,  only 
about  thirteen  millions  of  dollars.  By  what  magic  is  the  other  thir- 
teen to  be  procured  from  the  same  source  1 

The  senator  from  Rhode  Island  has  a  very  summary  mode  of  accom- 
plishing it,  by  putting  twenty  per  cent,  on  the  average  amount  of  free 
goods  for  several  years  back,  before  the  present  tariff  law  passed,  and 
including  among  them  three  years  of  the  highest  importation  in  our 
history.  This  is  a  little  too  sweeping  and  loose  for  a  body  like  this, 
and  for  critical  times  like  these.  Why,  sir,  though  that  average  was, 
from  various  causes,  swollen  to  near  seventy-one  millions,  yet  the 
actual  amount  of  free  goods,  in  1840,  was  only  fifty-seven  millions, 
instead  of  seventy-one ;  and,  in  1841,  only  about  fifty-four  millions  of 
free  goods  imported  and  retained  in  the  country.  But  this  is  not  all. 
By  the  present  tariff,  near  eighteen  millions  of  free  articles  besides  tea 
and  coffee,  and  about  thirty  millions  with  them,  are  still  left  free.  Put, 
then,  twenty  per  cent,  on  the  balance  of  twenty-four  and  twenty-seven 
millions,  and  you  would  obtain  a  net  additional  revenue  of  little  over 
one-fourth  what  is  needed.     If  you  place  twenty  per  cent,  on  tea  and 


226  NATIONAL  FINANCES. 

coffee  also,  and  leave  scarcely  anything  free  except  specie  and  articles 
to  aid  in  our  manufactures,  even  then  not  half  enough  will  be  procured. 

Adopt  another  form  of  calculation.  The  imports  not  reexported  in 
1840  were  about  ninety-five  millions,  and  in  1841  near  one  hundred 
and  nine  millions.  Now,  subtract  from  these  only  the  thirty  millions 
at  present  free,  and  twenty  per  cent,  on  the  balance  of  sixty-five  or 
seventy-nine  millions  would  yield  a  gross  revenue  of  only  about  thir- 
teen to  fifteen  millions,  and  a  net  one  of  at  least  a  million  and  a  half 
less.  Tax  tea  and  coffee  at  a  like  rate,  reducing  the  free  list  to 
eighteen  millions,  and  still  the  net  revenue  on  such  an  amount  of 
imports,  at  twenty  per  cent.,  will  be  but  fourteen  and  a  half  to  sixteen 
and  a  half  millions,  instead  of  twenty-six  millions. 

The  Senate,  however,  know  full  well  that  a  tax  of  twenty  per  cent, 
on  articles  before  free  will  diminish  the  amount  of  them  which  can  be 
purchased  and  consumed ;  and  hence  that  these  imports  would,  with 
only  that  tax,  have  been  smaller  in  both  1840  and  1841.  What,  then, 
are  they  likely  to  be  in  1842,  with  a  tax  of  twenty  per  cent,  on  all 
before  free,  except  eighteen  millions?  and,  besides  this,  with  cash 
duties,  a  bankrupt  system,  no  State  loans  coming  home,  and  an 
indebted,  embarrassed,  and  otherwise  highly  taxed  community.  It  is 
palpable  that  you  could  get  ten  millions  more  by  a  tariff  only  on  the 
hypothesis  that,  under  all  these  untoward  circumstances,  and  with  the 
tariff  more  than  doubled,  we  should  import  lawfully,  and  consume  quite 
as  much  as  needed  in  1840,  with  half  of  the  whole  entirely  free,  a 
credit  system  of  three  to  six  months,  without  interest,  no  bankrupt  bill, 
some  State  loans  returning  in  goods,  and  a  country  less  embarrassed. 

How  irrational !  If  tea  and  coffee  were  included,  rather  than  take 
back  the  lands,  the  tariff  need  not,  on  that  hypothesis,  be  increased 
quite  so  much.  But  still  it  must  go  as  high  as  thirty-six  or  thirty- 
seven  per  cent.,  to  procure  a  net  revenue  of  twenty-six  millions;  and 
the  whole  imports  must  also  continue  to  be  as  large.  But,  in  such  an 
event,  the  regular  imports,  instead  of  keeping  up  to  what  they  were  in 
1840,  would,  under  circumstances  so  very  different,  be  supplied,  in 
many  cases,  by  smuggling,  and  a  great  diminution  would  also  happen 
in  the  whole  consumption  of  foreign  merchandise,  however  obtained ; 
so  that  you  probably  could  not  realize  twenty-two  millions,  instead  of 
twenty-six.  You  would  get  protection,  I  grant.  You  would,  in  many 
cases,  obtain  entire  prohibition.  That  would  suit  the  senator  on  my 
right  (Mr.  Simmons),  and  his  manufactures.  But  will  it  give  you 
revenue, —  enough  revenue, —  twenty-six  millions  of  revenue?  That 
is  the  question.  Why,  sir,  that  senator  and  his  friends  desire  this  very 
state  of  things  in  order  to  diminish  imports,  and,  consequently,  revenue 
is  diminished  too.  If  a  higher  tariff  did  not  diminish  imports,  but 
leave  them  as  they  are,  or  allow  them  to  augment,  let  me  ask  what  use 
would  the  increase  of  duty  be  to  the  manufacturers  ? 

Away,  then,  with  the  fanciful,  impracticable  idea  that  you  can 
obtain  revenue  enough  by  a  tariff  to  equal  your  wants  of  twenty-six 


NATIONAL  FINANCES.  227 

millions,  without  adopting  this  amendment,  recalling  the  lands,  or 
without  resorting  to  direct  taxes  and  excise ! 

It  may  be  imagined  by  some  that,  after  a  year  or  two,  if  not  now, 
the  imports  may  again  increase  sufficiently,  as  the  exports  in  general 
increase  gradually  when  left  untrammelled. 

This  would  be  the  case,  were  it  not  for  the  entire  revolution  in  com- 
merce that  will  be  effected  by  cash  duties  and  the  bankrupt  system,  as 
well  as  the  permanent  and  increasing  check  on  imports  imposed  by  the 
increase  of  domestic  manufactures  under  so  high  a  tariff.  But  those 
circumstances,  when  all  combined,  will  make  our  imports  not  only  low, 
but  the  quantity  consumed  in  the  country  continue  stationary,  if  not 
retrograde. 

[Mr.  Archer  here  observed  that  this  might  be  deemed  an  advan- 
tage.] 

Yes,  sir,  an  advantage  to  the  manufacturers ;  high  and  effectual  pro- 
tection enough  to  them ;  but  not  to  the  consumer,  who  is  obliged  to  pay 
more  for  his  necessaries.  The  only  question  here,  however,  is,  whether 
it  will  cause  a  higher  revenue  from  customs.  Seldom  has  our  con- 
sumption increased  in  any  degree  corresponding  with  our  population. 
This  would  be  not  a  little  remarkable,  if  our  population  had  not  spread 
westward  in  agriculture,  and  had  not,  in  the  Eastern  and  Middle  States, 
become  more  devoted  to  manufactures.  Hence  the  consumption  of 
foreign  goods,  instead  of  increasing  in  a  ratio  with  population,  has  been 
almost  stationary,  over  several  great  periods  of  our  history.  The 
tables  are  before  me,  reported  to  Congress  by  the  treasury  depart- 
ment in  December,  1839,  giving  our  yearly  consumption  of  foreign 
articles  since  1789.  The  result  is,  that,  though  we  consumed  in  1820 
about  fifty-six  and  a  half  millions,  and  in  1790  only  twenty-two  and  a 
half, —  doubling  in  thirty  years,  as  few  manufactures  existed  then, — 
yet,  in  every  subsequent  period  often  years,  the  increase  in  consumption 
has  been  trifling.  In  1800  the  amount  consumed  was  about  fifty-two 
millions,  and  in  1830  only  fifty-six,  or  an  addition  of  but  four  millions 
in  thirty  years.  Again,  in  1810  the  consumption  was  sixty-one  mil- 
lions, and  in  1840  but  eighty-nine,  or  less  than  fifty  per  cent,  even 
under  imports  forced  on  us  unnaturally,  by  large  State  loans.  In  that 
period,  however,  our  population  had  augmented  over  one  hundred  per 
cent.  It  is  evident  that  consumption  must  fall  off  again  much  from 
1840,  by  means  of  a  high  tariff,  cash  duties,  and  pecuniary  embarrass- 
ments. So  that  even  the  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Finance  last 
December  computed  our  whole  imports,  the  ensuing  six  years,  as 
likely  to  be,  on  an  average,  not  over  one  hundred  and  sixteen  millions. 

A  few  days  ago  I  understood  him  to  consider  his  former  estimate 
too  high,  as  it  undoubtedly  is.  But,  taking  that,  and  deducting  eight- 
een millions  reexported,  and  we  have  ninety-eight  millions  left  for 
consumption.  This  is  too  high,  probably,  by  thirty  per  cent.  Yet, 
taking  from  even  that  the  present  free  list  of  thirty  millions,  and  the 
balance  of  sixty-eight  millions,  at  a  duty  of  twenty  per  cent.,  would 


228  NATIONAL  FINANCES. 

yield  Only  thirteen  millions  and  a  fraction.  This  would  leave  so  much 
more  to  be  raised  as  to  require  forty  per  cent,  duties  on  a  like  large 
import  to  produce  only  the  gross  amount  equal  to  the  net  revenue 
anticipated.  But,  with  any  per  cent,  whatever, —  even  taxing  tea  and 
coffee, — it  is  extremely  doubtful  whether  the  expectation  can  be  realized 
of  obtaining  twenty-six  millions  of  net  revenue  from  customs  alone. 
Why,  sir,  what  has  our  whole  history,  recorded  facts,  and  not  mere 
speculation  or  theorizing,  shown  on  this  point?  Never,  under  the 
high  tariffs  of  1824  and  1828,  have  we  received  in  net  revenue  from 
customs  as  much  as  twenty-six  millions,  except  in  two  years,  when  such 
large  amounts  were  coming  home  in  foreign  goods  for  State  loans,  and 
swelling  the  amount,  artificially,  so  much  beyond  all  expectation  and 
all  precedent.  Then,  also,  the  free  articles  were  but  little  more  than 
half  in  value  what  they  are  now,  without  tea  and  coffee. 

On  no  other  occasion  in  our  entire  existence  as  a  nation  have  the 
customs  yielded  so  much,  except  in  the  two  peculiar  years  at  the  close 
of  the  late  war,  when  the  duties  were  doubled,  and  large  imports  were 
compelled,  in  order  to  supply  the  privations  of  a  three  years'  war. 

Is  it  not,  then,,  a  miserable  delusion,  with  a  good  supply  on  hand  of 
foreign  merchandise,  and  the  whole  credit  system  itself,  as  well  as  its 
inflations,  private  and  State,  exploded,  to  expect  now  that  under  even 
double  the  present  rate  of  duties  we  can  realize  twenty-six  millions 
net  income  from  customs  1 

Do  gentlemen  forget,  likewise,  that  nothing  is  so  delusive  as  to  rely 
on  averages  since  1834, —  averages  in  a  period  of  unparalleled  expan- 
sions of  all  kinds,  and  excesses  that  never  can  be  repeated  while  the 
severe  pain  and  losses  sustained  by  them  are  fresh  in  recollection  ? 

Why,  sir,  as  explained  more  fully  in  the  annual  report  on  the 
finances,  in  December,  1839,  we  imported,  in  a  few  of  those  years  of 
over-action,  not  only  an  amount  equal  to  our  exports  and  a  fair  profit  on 
them,  but  one  equal  to  those  and  most  of  the  loans  procured  abroad  in 
the  same  period.  I  think  the  excess  was  near  a  hundred  and  thirty  mil- 
lions. Rather  than  expect  or  wish  a  repetition  of  this  extravagance, 
we  may  well  pray  God  to  avert  it,  if  there  were  the  smallest  likelihood 
of  its  occurrence.  No,  it  is  impossible.  What  follows  ?  Simply  that, 
persisting  in  your  other  resolutions,  you,  who  gave  away  the  lands  to 
relieve  the  States  from  direct  taxes,  will  be  forced  to  resort  to  direct 
taxes  yourselves,  in  order  to  supply  the  deficiency.  What  admirable 
wisdom  and  gain  to  the  community ! 

The  pilot  at  the  helm  of  State  says,  then,  as  to  the  lands,  manfully, 
bravely,  skilfully,  on  this  occasion  at  least,  Take  them  back.  Public 
sentiment  reechoes,  Take  them  back.  Reason  and  sound  policy  equally 
enjoin  the  same.  But  the  senator  from  Rhode  Island  (Mr.  Sim- 
mons), as  he  gets  three  millions  more  protection  to  manufactures  if 
the  lands  are  not  taken  back,  laments  the  evil  this  course  will  cause 
to  the  States,  our  partners  in  the  firm  of  the  General  Government, 
our  brethren  or  sisters  in  the  same  family  of  the  Union. 


NATIONAL  FINANCES.  229 

What,  sir !  an  evil  to  require  them  to  return  what  they  cannot 
retain  without  paying  for  it,  in  a  larger  tariff,  the  same  sum,  with  costs 
of  collection,  transfer,  and  distribution,  &c,  added,  equalling,  probably, 
twenty-five  to  fifty  per  cent. !  To  require  them  to  release  this  Indian 
gift, —  this  burden  of  twenty-five  or  fifty  dollars  more  in  every  hun- 
dred for  all  they  get !  But,  besides  this,  who  in  the  States  are  relieved 
from  direct  taxes  most,  and  who  are  burdened  most,  by  substituting  for 
them  the  tariff?  It  is  property  —  the  wealthy  —  that  are  attempted 
to  be  exonerated  from  direct  taxes,  in  order  to  throw  additional  bur- 
dens on  consumption,  or  the  middling  and  poorer  classes,  who  pay  per 
head  nearly  as  much,  under  a  tariff,  as  the  most  wealthy. 

Such  is  your  boasted  relief  proposed  by  the  distribution !  But  if 
you  cannot  obtain  enough  by  a  tariff,  and  must  yourselves  resort  to 
direct  taxation,  will  senators  inform  me  whether  then  even  the  wealthy, 
or  property,  are  relieved,  by  paying,  under  our  direct  taxes,  twenty- 
five  or  fifty  percent,  more,  for  double  collection,  commissions,  &c,  than 
they  would  be,  in  the  first  instance,  under  the  State  system  of  direct 
taxes  ? 

From  these  considerations,  it  must  ere  this  have  occurred  to  the 
whole  Senate  that  there  is  involved  in  the  success  of  this  amendment 
a  deep  question  of  character.  This  is,  in  truth,  a  question  nearly  as 
important,  if  not  more  so,  to  our  success  in  the  loan,  as  an  increase 
of  revenue  to  the  extent  of  three  millions.  Because,  by  taking  back 
the  lands  instantly,  and  before  the  loan  is  attempted,  whether  we  pledge 
them  or  not,  we  exhibit  to  the  public  a  returning  sense  of  right  to  the 
interests  of  the  General  Government, —  a  returning  foresight  in  finance, 
—  a  returning  prudence  and  precaution  in  danger, —  a  disposition  to 
rise  above  mere  party  measures,  and  the  wisdom  to  look  to  facts  and 
arguments,  and  the  spirit  of  measures  rather  than  to  bald  forms. 

We  shall  evince  efforts  —  real  efforts,  practical  efforts  —  to  succeed 
without  making  unnecessary  sacrifices  :  efforts  adapted  to  obtain  better 
terms  and  redeem  our  promises,  as  well  as  make  them ;  and  efforts,  like 
those  of  individuals  asking  indulgences,  directed  prudently  to  secure, 
no  less  than  indemnify,  in  the  end,  those  who  are  so  obliging  as  to 
grant  those  indulgences.  Such  a  course  must  improve  our  character 
as  to  monied  matters,  and  inspire  confidence ;  while  the  opposite 
course  will  shake  confidence.  Such  a  system  of  conduct,  in  private 
life,  wins  trust  and  better  terms  in  borrowing ;  while  its  opposite,  even 
with  more  means  in  prospective,  disappoints  and  disgusts,  saps  faith, 
alienates  regard,  and  prevents  success. 

Why  should  we,  in  this  business,  slight  the  experience  and  axioms  of 
all  people,  as  well  as  all  governments  ?  Are  we  alone  likely  to  suc- 
ceed on  a  set  of  principles  and  under  a  series  of  measures  which,  every- 
where else,  and  in  all  recorded  time,  have  led  both  individuals  and 
nations  to  pecuniary  disgrace  and  bankruptcy  ?  Is  it  left  to  this  age, 
and  this  administration,  alone  to  be  wiser  than  all  antiquity  or  modern 
times,  and  outstrip  all  the  Neckers  and  Hamiltons  of  the  past?  Con- 
20 


230  NATIONAL  FINANCES. 

siderations  like  these  bear  strongly  on  the  question  of  character ;  and 
character,  quite  as  much  as  property,  is  necessary  to  insure  success  in 
borrowing. 

Who  ever  before  heard  of  an  individual,  or  government,  when  out 
of  money  and  embarrassed,  giving  away  a  sum  equal  to  one-fifth  of  all 
the  permanent  income  anticipated?  Or,  when  out  of  money  and 
embarrassed,  not  only  do  that,  but  at  the  same  time  increase  expenses 
nearly  one-fourth  1 

Most  clearly,  such  conduct  cannot  but  have  a  disastrous  influence 
on  any  loan  attempted ;  while,  to  change  this  conduct  to  the  reverse, 
would  as  clearly  operate  very  favorably  on  such  a  loan.  Again :  who 
ever  before  heard  of  an  individual,  or  government,  out  of  money  and 
embarrassed,  and  thus,  also,  out  of  credit,  refusing  either  to  give  secu- 
rity for  loans  when  in  its  power,  or  to  increase  its  revenue  when  in  its 
power,  by  an  easy  addition  to  it  of  three  or  four  millions  ? 

Thus  out  of  money  and  out  of  credit,  how  absurd  is  it  to  anticipate 
more  credit  while  remaining  in  the  same  condition  and  with  the  same 
character, —  to  expect  success  in  a  loan  without  either  new  security  or 
new  means,  but  merely  to  repeat  the  eternal  round  of  every  spendthrift 
and  bankrupt,  by  offering  new  promises  for  others  already  broken,  and 
new  and  greater  sacrifices,  discounts,  and  usury,  to  repair  old  breaches 
of  contract  ?  This  course  is  also  characterized  by  a  changeableness 
and  indecision  of  character  equally  fatal  to  any  prospect  of  success  in 
borrowing. 

By  taking  back  the  lands  now,  under  all  these  circumstances,  we 
abide  by  the  spirit  of  the  distribution ;  while,  by  a  refusal  to  do  it,  we 
are  unstable  and  vacillating.  Once,  likewise,  they  were  to  be  given 
away  only  when  a  surplus  existed  in  the  treasury;  now,  when  none 
exists.  Once,  they  were  to  be  taken  back,  if  the  duties  must  be  raised 
above  twenty  per  cent. ;  now,  they  are  not  to  be.  Once,  they  were  to 
be  held  to  pay  the  debts  of  the  Union ;  now,  they  are  not  to  be.  Once, 
they  were  to  be  recalled,  if  war  occurred;  now,  they  are  not  to  be, 
though  forced  into  numerous  preparations  and  increased  expenditures 
for  war,  which,  in  point  of  principle,  is  equivalent,  in  this  respect,  to 
war  itself,  and  though  the  disastrous  Florida  war  still  continues,  which 
the  friends  of  the  present  administration  promised  to  finish  in  a  single 
month.  Look  at  a  few  other  arguments  used,  and  changes  proposed  in 
financial  matters,  as  bearing  on  the  fiscal  consistency  and  firmness  of 
character  in  those  who  are  to  seek  by  this  loan  the  confidence  of  capi- 
talists and  the  community. 

Thus,  the  friends  of  the  administration  generally  in  this  body  argue 
against  the  utility  of  any  pledge  whatever  to  secure  this  loan;  while 
the  House  of  Representatives,  by  the  votes  of  almost  all  their  friends 
there,  have  inserted  in  the  bill  a  pledge  of  the  duties,  and  nobody 
among  them  here  moves  to  strike  it  out.  The  same  friends  here,  and 
especially  the  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Finance  (Mr.  Evans), 
argue  that  a  short  loan  can  be  obtained  on  better  terms,  or  will  be 


NATIONAL  FINANCES.  231 

higher  in  value  in  the  market,  than  a  long  loan ;  and  yet  he  insists  on 
keeping  in  the  bill  a  power  to  make  the  longest  loan  ever  authorized 
in  this  country  in  a  period  of  peace. 

Next,  their  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  in  1841,  asked  for  only  twelve 
years  ;  now,  the  same  officer  asks  for  a  long  loan,  and  twenty  years  is 
given.  Last  year,  the  majority  in  Congress  thought  three  years  long 
enough ;  now,  the  same  majority  insists  that  twenty  is  not  too  long. 
Last  year,  Congress  expressly  prohibited  any  sale  of  the  loan  below 
par,  as  has  always  been  done  in  peace,  except  in  1798  ;  now,  it  is  pro- 
posed expressly  to  permit  it,  and  to  any  extent,  and  without  any  lim- 
itation. But  one  brief  month  since,  the  Senate  likewise  resolved, 
almost  unanimously,  that  the  expenses  of  the  year  ought  to  be  met  by 
means  raised  within  the  year ;  and  the  author  of  the  resolution  (Mr. 
Clay)  urged  its  early  passage,  as  one  measure  calculated  to  restore 
public  confidence  and  improve  our  credit;  now,  in  the  teeth  of  all 
that,  we  gravely  propose  to  postpone  the  payment  of  at  least  ten  mil- 
lions of  the  expenses  of  the  present  year,  not  only  beyond  the  pres- 
ent year,  but  for  twenty  years,  and  to  burden  with  them  the  next 
generation,  or  our  children  and  our  children's  children. 

Again :  the  loan  bill  is  hurried,  because  it  is  said  the  money  is 
needed  now, —  has  been  needed  for  months  ;  —  and  yet,  we  propose  to 
make  a  bill  in  such  a  form  as  is  not  expected  to  succeed  in  this  coun- 
try, but  to  go  abroad,  and  require  at  least  three  months  to  make  full 
inquiries  and  receive  returns.  In  other  words,  we  refuse  to  adopt  the 
amendment,  and  take  back  the  proceeds  of  the  public  lands  at  once, 
when  at  once  wanted,  when  constantly  coming  in,  and  which  are  the 
best  security  to  obtain  more,  and  which  would  themselves  yield  much 
more,  but  for  culpable  neglect  in  advertising  them ;  and  we  substitute, 
in  this  emergency,  a  means  of  procuring  the  money  not  likely  to  suc- 
ceed at  all,  except  at  ruinous  discount,  and  then  after  a  quarter  of  a 
year's  delay.  Recollect,  also,  that  these  things  are  not  done  in  a  cor- 
ner, or  under  a  bushel,  but  on  the  house-top.  The  whole  country,  as 
well  as  capitalists,  witness,  and  scrutinize,  and  weigh,  the  kind  of 
character  evinced  by  such  a  course  of  proceeding. 

It  is  known,  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic,  that  never  before,  in 
peace,  have  we  authorized  such  a  sale  of  stocks  at  a  depreciation,  except 
in  the  administration  of  the  elder  Adams  ;  that  never  before,  in  peace, 
have  we  attempted  to  shuffle  off  the  current  expenses  by  a  loan  till 
the  next  generation.  That  never  before,  in  peace,  have  we  been 
subjected  to  pay  more  than  six  per  cent.,  and  seldom  so  much, 
except  under  the  unfortunate  extravagances  of  1798.  They  all 
see  and  understand  that  in  this  way  a  permanent  and  large  national 
debt  is  to  be  established,  without  war,  and  our  farms  virtually  mort- 
gaged to  secure  it  forever,  and  often  to  foreigners.  The  borrower  is 
thus  made  servant  to  the  lender,  and  no  escape  from  the  usury,  extor- 
tion, or  immense  loss  involved  in  such  a  loan,  but  in  utter  bankruptcy 
or  repudiation.     The  last  is  deprecated  and  dreaded ;  yet  tempted  in 


232  NATIONAL  FINANCES. 

those  who  will  hereafter  be  requested  to  pay  large  sums  of  discount, 
not  a  dollar  of  which,  either  under  them  or  their  fathers,  ever  went 
into  the  public  treasury. 

There  is  much  in  this  to  make  us  pause,  and  especially  to  make 
lenders  pause.  The  history  of  this  novel  and  derogatory  proposition, 
both  as  to  the  length  of  time  and  the  sacrifice  of  our  stock  for  any- 
thing it  may  chance  to  bring,  is  not  a  little  curious.  Twenty  years 
were  not  dreamed  of,  last  July,  by  Mr.  Ewing  or  anybody  else.  He 
recommended  only  twelve  years,  and  Congress  sanctioned  but  three. 
At  the  commencement  of  this  session,  Mr.  Forward  recommended,  in 
his  annual  report,  a  longer  time  than  three ;  but  he  does  not  hint  at 
even  twelve  years, —  much  less  twenty ;  and  the  latter  time  must  have 
been  adopted,  I  fear,  from  some  wretched  precedent  of  State  or  city 
borrowing  in  the  late  ruinous  speculations,  and  which  have  sunk  the 
credit  of  several  of  them  down,  first  to  freezing-point,  and  then  to  zero. 

As  to  the  other  project,  of  selling  the  stock  for  what  it  will  bring,  it 
was  not  tolerated  at  all  by  Mr.  Ewing, —  not  even  hinted  at  by  Mr. 
Forward  in  his  annual  report, —  is  expressly  prohibited  in  all  our 
other  loan  bills  in  peace,  except  the  reprobated  one  of  1798 ;  and  it 
is  also  forbidden  in  most  of  the  States,  however  desperate  in  other 
respects  about  their  credit.  Whoever  is  the  author  of  so  derogatory 
a  proposition,  its  first  appearance,  to  my  eye,  was  from  New  York, 
and  probably  the  purlieus  of  Wall-street,  in  the  printed  letter  in  my 
hand,  dated  March  8,  1842.  In  that,  among  other  matters,  it  is 
observed,  "The  loan  bill  must  be  passed,  and  the  stock  sold  to  the 
highest  bidder."  Since  that,  we  hear  constantly,  morning,  noon,  and 
night,  the  only  specific  or  panacea  among  the  wise  financiers  in  both 
Houses,  '•  The  loan  bill  must  be  passed,  and  the  stock  sold  to  the 
highest  bidder"  This  last  thriftless  and  destructive  shift,  to  sell  the 
stock  "to  the  highest  bidder"  and  that  for  twenty  years,  seems  to 
be  the  very  alpha  and  omega  of  the  wisdom  now  connected  with  our 
finances.  Sir,  only  three  days  after  the  date  of  that  dictatorial  letter, 
the  present  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  himself  writes  to  the  chairman 
of  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means  in  the  other  House,  requesting 
"  a  provision  in  the  loan  bill  by  which  the  stock  can  be  sold  for  what- 
ever it  will  bring." 

This  is  the  wretched  finale  of  all  that  skill,  economy,  and  prosper- 
ity, with  which  a  new  administration  was  to  relieve  all  the  distresses 
of  the  community  at  large,  and  especially  conduct  the  finances  of  the 
country  on  most  accurate,  saving,  and  wonderfully  improved  plans, 
compared  with  what  preceded  it.  Our  opponents  took  the  treasury  in 
successful  operation  on  the  4th  of  March,  1841, —  every  demand  paid 
punctually,  public  credit  never  higher  or  quicker,  its  stocks  and 
notes  at  or  above  par,  no  debt  beyond  five  and  a  half  millions,  tem- 
porary, and  the  power  to  issue  five  millions  more  of  treasury  notes,  if 
necessary,  besides  nearly  a  million  of  dollars  in  money  on  hand.  Yet, 
in  a  single  year,  during  profound  peace,  all  our  fiscal  operations  have 


NATIONAL  FINANCES.  233 

become  stagnated  and  embarrassed, —  debts  protested  for  non-pay- 
ment ;  creditors  and  contractors,  at  times,  without  either  money  or  even 
depreciated  treasury  notes ;  public  credit  destroyed,  and  our  stocks 
driven  from  the  market ;  a  debt  contemplated,  permanent  or  tempo- 
rary, which,  by  the  close  of  1842,  must  equal  at  least  twenty-four 
millions ;  revenue  falling  off,  expenses  increasing,  and  no  effectual 
remedy  able  to  be  devised  by  this  administration,  but  to  follow  the 
Wall-street  command ;  and  after  one  loan  bill  last  July  in  a  perma- 
nent form,  and  another  last  January  in  the  shape  of  treasury  notes, 
to  introduce  a  third  one  within  eight  months,  and  cry  out  to  all, 
'•The  loan  bill  must  be  passed,  and  the  stock  sold  to  the  highest 
bidder^ 

We  seem,  as  yet,  hardly  aware  of  the  discredit  we  ourselves,  by 
refusing  to  amend  this  bill  in  any  important  respect,  throw  on  our 
own  loan.  We  brand  on  its  front  ignominy  and  depreciation.  We 
invite  shaving  of  the  deepest  cut,  by  refusing  to  adopt  the  only 
amendments  which  can  avert  it,  first  to  take  back  the  lands,  and  then 
shorten  the  period  of  the  loan,  and  prohibit  any  sale  under  par.  After 
adopting  those  in  succession,  we  might  then,  to  avoid  all  risk  of  fail- 
ure, authorize  giving  seven  or  eight  per  Cent,  interest,  if  found  to  be 
necessary,  though  it  would  be  much  less  likely  to  be  required.  Then 
the  payment  of  even  that  interest  for  only  four  or  five  years  would 
not  be  equal  to  one-tenth  of  the  loss  on  a  loan  for  twenty  years, 
though  at  a  smaller  rate  of  interest.  If  we  cannot  retrieve  our  credit 
in  four  or  five  years,  so  as  to  borrow  money  at  par,  or  pay  it  off,  our 
affairs  must  continue  to  be  sadly  conducted.  If  we  do  not  mean  to  pay 
off  the  current  expenses  in  peace  by  the  end  of  five  years  more,  the 
stewardship  over  the  public  affairs  should  at  once  be  changed.  Look 
at  an  illustration  on  this  point,  in  figures. 

If  we  take  back  the  lands,  and  pledge  them  as  proposed  in  this 
amendment,  and  then  shorten  the  term  of  the  loan  to  five  years,  and, 
prohibiting  a  sale  below  par,  are  obliged  to  give  eight  per  cent,  inter- 
est for  the  eleven  millions  of  money,  then  the  whole  principal  goes 
into  the  treasury,  without  deduction,  posterity  is  not  burdened  nor 
tempted  into  wrong,  and  we  have  to  pay  in  interest,  discount  and 
principal,  only  $14,000,000.  But  if  we  refuse  such  amendments, 
and  are  obliged  to  make  a  discount  on  the  loan,  so  as  to  yield  eight 
per  cent,  for  twenty  years, —  which  is  what  our  present  six  per  cent, 
stock  is  selling  at, — the  discount  must  be  so  exorbitant  that  we  will  get 
not  over  eighty-four  dollars  for  every  hundred.  That  loss,  with  the 
six  per  cent,  interest  paid  on  the  whole  one  hundred  for  twenty  years, 
will  compel  us  to  pay  more  than  four  times  as  much  for  the  money  we 
get  as  we  should  in  the  other  case. 

If  we  sold  this  stock  at  a  loss  of  only  ten  dollars  in  one  hundred, 

or  for  ninety, —  which  is  about  seven  per  cent.,  and  is  low  as  can  be 

expected  at  this  moment, — we  lose,  at  once,  over  a  million  of  dollars  in 

principal,  and  we  pay  an  interest  for  twenty  years  on  one-tenth  of  the 

20* 


234  NATIONAL  FINANCES. 

whole  principal,  which  we  never  get,  and  that  would,  if  put  at  com- 
pound interest,  equal  two  millions  more  in  the  twenty  years.  Thus, 
quite  three  millions  will  be  sacrificed  of  interest  and  principal,  or  a  sum 
equal  to  more  than  one-fourth  of  the  whole  loan  authorized. 

Let  me  remind  the  Senate  that  we  go  into  the  market  not  only  with 
this  exposure  to  ruinous  loss,  but  with  an  actual  debt  contemplated 
some  millions  higher  than  what  this  bill  will  fund. 

It  is  manifest,  on  a  little  scrutiny,  that,  following  out  the  policy  pro- 
posed on  the  other  side,  the  real  debt,  at  the  end  of  this  year,  will  be 
near  twenty-three  millions,  instead  of  only  seventeen,  as  some  suppose, 
or  only  twenty-one  millions,  as  others  suppose.  So  that  the  public 
and  monied  men  will  perceive  that  even  this  loan,  if  the  treasury 
notes  are  all  funded,  as  gentlemen  on  the  other  side  profess  to  intend, 
is  forthwith  or  soon  to  be  followed  by  another  permanent  loan,  nearly 
half  as  large  as  this ;  because  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  makes 
the  deficiency  in  his  report,  at  the  commencement  of  the  year,  likely 
to  be,  by  its  close,  near  fourteen  millions  and  a  quarter.  He  needed 
at  least  a  million  and  a  half  more  on  hand  in  the  treasury,  to  facilitate 
disbursements  and  transfers.  Since  that,  he  is  convinced,  as  the  chair- 
man is  (Mr.  Evans),  that  the  customs  will  yield  about  three  millions 
less  in  1842  than  he  supposed.  Supply  that,  and  the  amount  to  be 
left  on  hand,  with  the  deficiency,  and  they  equal  near  eighteen  millions 
and  three-fourths.  Quite  a  million  more  will  probably  be  lost  in  this 
loan  by  deduction  at  the  start,  and  must  otherwise  be  made  up.  So 
that  this,  and  the  old  loan  of  six  millions,  will,  with  the  eighteen  and 
three-fourths  millions,  constitute  an  aggregate  of  near  twenty-five  mil- 
lions of  debt.  Whatever  reduction  is  made  in  expenses  below  the  Sec- 
retary's estimate  will  lessen  this,  and  whatever  is  added  by  Congress 
will  increase  it.  In  order  to  carry  your  policy  into  effect,  of  funding 
all  the  treasury  notes,  as  well  as  meeting  these  changes,  another  per- 
manent loan  may  be  needed  of  eight  or  nine  millions.  If  you  do  not 
redeem  the  treasury  notes,  but  can  and  do  keep  them  out,  by  paying 
six  per  cent,  interest  on  them,  you  may  make  the  whole  debt,  if  you 
please,  near  twenty-seven  millions,  because  the  old  and  new  permanent 
debt  will  be  seventeen,  and  the  old  and  new  treasury  notes  out  will 
constitute  near  ten  millions  more.  This  prospect  is  most  disheartening. 
But  to  keen-eyed  and  sagacious  capitalists  it  will  look  still  worse  than 
this,  if  your  course  be  not  altered ;  because,  beside  another  seven  mil- 
lion loan  in  1842,  in  addition  to  this,  under  a  form  either  permanent 
or  as  treasury  notes,  they  look  at  the  ensuing  years.  Then,  as  things 
now  stand,  not  much  more  can  be  raised  at  present  by  a  tariff:  and 
your  expenditures  bid  fair  to  exceed  your  receipts  annually  at  least 
ten  millions,  unless  you  take  back  the  lands,  retrench  greatly,  or 
resort  to  direct  taxes.  Nobody  believes  that  you  dare  attempt  the 
latter,  or  to  impose  internal  duties.  And  hence,  if  you  will  not  repeal 
the  distribution  bill,  or  reduce  much  more  the  expenses,  utter  insol- 
vency and  national  repudiation  glare  at  us  all  in  the  face.     But  how 


NATIONAL  FINANCES.  235 

would  the  scene  be  changed,  by  adopting  a  different  policy,  even  at  this 
late  day,  and  after  the  losses  of  1841  of  receipts  from  lands  by  not 
advertising,  and  the  waste  by  adding  then  five  or  six  millions  to  our 
expenses ! 

Thus,  limit  your  expenses,  as  well  you  may,  to  twenty  millions,  and 
that  not  so  low  by  two  millions  as  >we  contemplated  and  were  fast 
approaching.  Add  three  more  to  cover  contingencies,  debt  and 
interest,  and  the  whole  expenditure  need  not  exceed  twenty-three  mil- 
lions. This  result  we  have  yet  in  our  own  power,  by  cutting  down  the 
new  appropriations,  and,  if  necessary,  postponing  or  lessening  some  of 
the  old  ones.  If  it  be  not  always  too  soon  or  too  late,  too  small  or 
too  large  a  case,  too  hard  or  too  soft  an  instance  for  reduction,  the 
retrenchment  can  and  will  go  to  that  extent,  and,  as  I  have  before 
shown,  will  leave  all  our  great  national  establishments  efficient. 
There  is  not  half  so  much  trouble  or  danger  in  facing  such  measures 
as  many  suppose.  I  have  been  through  similar  scenes  of  reduction, 
from  1837  and  1838  to  1839  near  six  millions,  and  thence  to  1840 
quite  two  and  a  half  millions  more.  All  this  was  before  the  Presi- 
dential election.  We  have  only  to  imitate  this,  and  go  on  in  a  like 
course  as  was  contemplated  in  1841,  when  retrenchment  was  to  bring 
down  the  whole  expenditure  to  twenty  or  eighteen  millions.  The  task 
is  far  easier,  because  the  works  and  undertakings  are  finished,  and  old 
objects  are  accomplished  yearly.  This  circumstance  alone  will  lessen, 
and  continue  hereafter  to  lessen,  the  expenses  almost  as  fast  as  pro- 
posed, if  we  forbear  from  running  into  new  and  unnecessary  expenses. 
Resolve  on  it,  then,  firmly ;  begin,  and  the  business  is  at  once  half 
clone  at  your  hands.  How,  next,  shall  we  meet  the  twenty-three 
millions  proposed  in  the  present  year  1 

By  twenty  millions  from  customs,  as  estimated  by  the  chairman  (Mr. 
Evans)  in  January  last,  or  nineteen,  as  estimated  by  the  Secretary, 
and  one  million  more  accruing  this  year  above  twenty  per  cent.,  which 
he  omitted ;  add  to  this  the  receipts  from  the  lands,  if  properly  adver- 
tised, and  the  whole  can  be  discharged.  But  now  the  chairman  wishes 
to  correct  his  former  estimates,  and  make  something  like  three  to  four 
millions  difference  in  them  in  only  two  or  three  months.  I  trust,  under 
this  request,  he  will  feel  a  little  more  charity  hereafter,  as  well  as 
those  who  are  associated  with  him,  for  any  errors  made  by  others  in 
estimates.  The  senator  from  Kentucky  (Mr.  Crittenden),  has  set 
a  good  example  on  this  point,  since  his  short  experience  in  executive 
office,  by  saying  that  he  now  believed  no  administration  —  not  even 
one  under  General  Harrison  —  could  get  on  without  some  mistakes 
and  wrongs. 

But,  correcting  this  error  of  three  millions  in  their  estimates,  and 
putting  a  tax  of  only  twenty  per  cent,  on  tea  and  coffee,  we  have  an 
ample  supply  to  discharge  all  the  necessary  expenses  of  the  year.  As 
to  the  treasury  notes  now  out,  senators  will  perceive  that  many  of 
them  would  thus  be  extinguished  before  the  year  ends,  without  any 


236  IMPORTANCE   OF  THE  VETO   POWER. 

additional  loans.  But  what  are  not  so  disposed  of  I  would  cheerfully 
fund  at  six  per  cent,  for  a  few  years,  on  a  pledge  of  ample  security. 
They  then  come  at  once  to  par  in  value,  and  remain  there ;  and  the 
whole  debt  of  every  kind  can  and  will  then,  in  a  few  years,  be  entirely 
extinguished. 

We  should  thus  escape  national  bankruptcy, —  millions  on  millions 
would  be  saved  to  a  naked  treasury, —  public  credit  would  revive,  and 
escape  a  brand  and  degradation,  under  the  terms  of  this  loan,  which 
can  never  be  effaced.  No  temptation  will  be  held  out  to  repudiation, 
—  dreaded  and  sincerely  deprecated  repudiation.  A  permanent 
national  debt,  built  up  in  profound  peace,  would  be  most  happily 
avoided.  The  sacred  compromise,  as  to  the  tariff,  ten  years  ago, 
would  continue  inviolate.  The  new  compromise,  solemnly  and  explic- 
itly enacted  at  only  the  last  session,  will  not  be  profaned.  The  highly- 
prized  resolution  of  the  distinguished  senator  (Mr.  Clay)  who  has 
just  left  us,  pledging  the  Senate  to  raise  means  enough  within  the  year 
to  meet  all  the  expenses  of  the  year,  will  not  be  trodden  under  foot  by 
his  friends,  as  soon  as  his  back  is  turned.  We  shall  refuse  to  show 
real  vacillation  and  mutability,  and  at  the  same  moment  will  evince 
the  candor  and  courage  to  do  right,  however  different  in  form  from 
what  party  influences  or  party  prejudices  may  countenance.  Instead, 
then,  of  making  bad  worse,  and  trying  new  and  dangerous  experi- 
ments, we  shall  return  to  courses,  in  matters  of  finance,  sanctioned  by 
the  experience  of  all  ages,  in  public  as  well  as  private  life.  May  we 
decide  wisely,  then;  for  thus  our  "bane  and  antidote  are  both  before 


IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER.* 


There  are  a  few  circumstances,  connected  with  this  proposition  to 
lessen  or  abolish  the  veto  power,  which  have  struck  me  with  some 
surprise. 

If  we  were  now  in  the  midst  of  a  revolution,  and  such  an  one  as 
ended  in  our  independence,  it  would  not  be  unnatural  for  men  who 
had  suffered  severely  from  executive  oppression  to  be  prejudiced 
strongly  against  all  executive  power.     Especially  when  these  wrongs 

*  A  speech  in  support  of  the  veto  power  ;  delivered  in  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States,  Feb.  23,  1842. 


IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER.  237 

had  been  inflicted  by  the  monarch,  rather  than  the  people,  of  another 
country,  and  many  of  them  through  the  absolute  vetoes  of  his  subser- 
vient governors,  sent  here  to  domineer  over  us,  well  might  we,  in  the 
excitement,  denounce  such  vetoes  as  arbitrary,  and  such  an  executive 
as  tyrannical.  Hence,  one  of  the  first  grounds  of  grievance  detailed 
in  the  Declaration  of  Independence  was,  that  the  king  had  refused 
his  assent  to  laivs  the  most  wholesome  and  necessary  for  the  'pub- 
lic good.  He  claimed  the  power  to  do  this,  also,  from  Divine  right, 
and  not,  as  our  executive  derives  it,  from  the  people.  He  exercised  it 
for  his  own  benefit,  and  that  of  his  kingly  third  estate*  in  the  realm, 
and  not,  as  our  executive  does,  for  the  benefit  of  the  people.  He  used 
it  himself,  or  by  others,  almost  as  often  and  capriciously  as  Queen 
Elizabeth,  who  vetoed  thirty-four  laws  in  one  session ;  and  not  merely, 
as  here,  on  great  and  grave  occasions,  occurring  but  twenty  times  in 
half  a  century. 

Circumstances  like  these  made  Doctor  Franklin  averse  to  any 
executive  chief  magistrate,  and  induced  several  of  the  States,  in  their 
first  constitutions,  formed  in  the  heat  and  struggle  of  the  Revolution, 
with  wounds  still  bleeding  from  abuses,  to  give  no  veto  to  their  gov- 
ernors, and  in  other  cases  to  give  a  less  one  than  that  in  the  present 
constitution  of  the  General  Government.  Indeed,  it  even  led  them, 
in  other  cases,  like  the  old  Confederation,  either  to  have  no  separate 
executive  whatever,  or  one  elected  by,  and  entirely  dependent  on, 
the  legislature. 

But,  after  the  experience  of  eight  years  in  the  great  conflict,  and 
four  or  five  more  in  peace,  subsequent  to  the  achievement  of  independ- 
ence, the  wisest  and  ablest  from  all  quarters  of  the  country  convened, 
and  decided  almost  unanimously  in  favor  of  the  propriety  of  the  pres- 
ent veto.  They  cast  aside  prejudices.  They  resorted  to  reason  and 
experience,  and  in  the  very  first  project  of  materials  for  a  constitution, 
submitted  in  the  convention  by  Mr.  Randolph,  the  present  veto  power 
was  introduced.  It  was  repeated  again  in  Mr.  Pinckney's  articles,  and 
in  all  the  numerous  changes  afterwards  made  in  other  matters,  this 
remained  unaltered,  except  in  the  majority,  from  three-fourths  to  two- 
thirds,  necessary  to  overrule  its  operation.  In  the  end,  too,  it  received 
the  large  and  almost  unanimous  vote  of  ten  States  out  of  twelve.  The 
journal  and  debates  are  before  me,  but  I  will  not  detain  the  Senate  by 
quotations  or  more  details.  What  is  equally  striking,  on  this  subject, 
must  be  the  fact,  that,  in  none  of  the  conventions  of  the  people  in  the 
different  States  for  adopting  the  constitution,  do  we  find  the  veto  dis- 
agreed to.  Numerous,  also,  as  were  the  amendments  proposed  in 
various  other  particulars,  such  was  the  harmony  as  to  this,  that  not 
one  relates  to  any  further  restriction  of  it ;  nor  has  one  of  the  amend- 
ments adopted  since  laid  a  profane  hand  upon  it.  Nor  have  I  been 
able  to  discover  in  a  convention  of  the  people,  or  in  a  State  Legisla- 
ture, long  ago  or  lately,  during  the  whole  lapse  of  a  half-century,  a 
single  proposition  deliberately  introduced  to  restrict  or  destroy  the  veto. 


238  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER. 

Jealous,  and  justly  so,  as  our  people  have  always  been  of  executive 
power,  and  open  as  they  have  ever  been  to  impulses,  where  so  much 
freedom  of  opinion  and  discussion  properly  exist,  nothing  has  ever 
shaken  their  sagacity,  intelligence,  and  firmness,  in  defence  of  a  power 
which  they  know  full  well  now  exists  for  them,  and  not  for  a  monarch ; 
now  lives  for  their  security  against  errors  by  their  agents,  and  not  as 
a  weapon  with  which  to  oppress  the  people  themselves ;  and  which,  if 
dissatisfied,  they  well  know  can  be  overruled  by  them  at  any  time, 
quickly,  either  by  electing  new  members  to  the  legislature,  or  a  new 
executive,  without  changing  their  constitution  or  removing  salutary 
checks  on  their  representatives. 

Under  all  these  circumstances,  it  certainly  must  be  a  matter  of  some 
surprise  to  others,  as  well  as  to  me,  that  now,  for  the  first  time,  and 
not  coming  from  the  people  or  the  States,  or  the  popular  branch  of 
the  legislature,  a  proposal  originates  here,  and  with  a  single  member, 
to  throw  away  some  of  the  checks  over  us  which  the  people  and  the 
States  so  deliberately  ordained.  Such  a  proposition  can,  I  admit,  be 
legally  made ;  and,  in  this  instance,  doubtless  springs  from  laudable 
motives.  But,  in  these  particulars,  it  is  surely  not  a  little  extraor- 
dinary. 

The  mover  disclaimed  any  influence  on  him  from  recent  events,  or 
the  manifesto  of  a  part  of  the  whig  members  of  Congress,  in  Septem- 
ber, 1841.  In  my  opinion,  he  might  well  do  this  so  far  as  regards 
the  manifesto,  though  others  in  the  debate  have  considered  that  as  the 
cause  of  the  present  movement.  Because,  sir,  beside  all  the  array, 
by  way  of  authority,  to  which  I  have  alluded,  in  favor  of  the  present 
veto,  it  is  clear  to  my  mind,  on  recurring  to  the  manifesto  itself,  that 
the  signers  of  it  did  not  believe,  before  the  recent  events  of  the  extra 
session,  that  the  constitution,  in  respect  to  the  veto,  ought  in  any 
particular  to  be  altered.  Here  it  is,  sir,  and  the  very  reverse  seems 
to  me  to  be  the  truth.  The  language  on  that  point  is,  that  they  had 
intended  to  restrain  executive  poiver  and  patronage,  in  respect  to 
the  veto,  by  voluntary  self-denial  in  its  excessive  use,  and  not  by 
any  change  in  the  magna  charta  of  our  liberties.  The  constitution 
was  to  continue  untouched.  This  idea  is  forfeited  by  what  was  avowed 
only  last  March,  by  another  exponent  of  the  principles  of  gentlemen 
on  the  other  side,  more  widely  relied  on  than  even  the  signers  of  the 
manifesto.  As  that  exponent  was  General  Harrison,  this  remark  will, 
of  course,  not  be  deemed  derogatory  to  any  of  these  highly  respectable 
signers.  Without  adverting  to  what  may  have  been  uttered  by  him 
at  popular  meetings,  and  misapprehended  or  misrepresented,  I  hold 
here  his  deliberate  official  expose  on  the  veto,  in  his  inaugural ;  and 
among  other  remarks  there,  which  need  not  be  repeated,  he  says  : 

The  veto  power  "  appears  to  be  highly  expedient,  and  if  used  only  -with  the  for- 
bearance and  in  the  spirit  which  was  intended  by  its  authors,  it  may  be  productive 
of  great  good,  and  be  found  one  of  the  best  safeguards  to  the  Union." 


IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER.  239 

He  adds  that,  in  his  opinion,  it  was 

'*  To  be  used  only,  first,  to  protect  the  constitution  from  violation  ;  secondly,  the 
people  from  the  effects  of  hasty  legislation,  where  their  will  has  been  probably  disre- 
garded or  not  well  understood  ;  and,  thirdly,  to  prevent  the  effects  of  combinations 
violative  of  the  rights  of  minorities." 

From  the  beginning  to  the  end,  not  a  syllable  is  uttered  in  favor  of 
lessening  the  veto  by  a  change  of  the  constitution ;  but,  on  the  con- 
trary, General  Harrison  proposed,  in  these  cases,  to  exercise  it  as 
widely  as  it  ever  has  been  exercised  from  the  foundation  of  the  gov- 
ernment. So  that  this  motion  does  not  appear  to  emanate  from  the 
whig  party  as  a  whole,  or  even  from  a  portion  of  it  in  legislative  cau- 
cus, unless  it  has  sprung  from  the  eventful  negatives  of  the  bank  bills, 
at  the  late  extra  session.  But,  in  my  view,  it  was  not  intended  to  go 
as  far  as  this,  even  at  the  excited  meeting  of  a  portion  of  the  members 
of  Congress,  in  September,  smarting  under  disappointment  and  rebuked 
by  executive  difference  in  opinion.  The  manifesto  they  sent  forth  does 
not,  could  not,  and,  looking  to  the  intelligence  and  character  embodied 
in  the  meeting,  I  might  well  add,  dared  not,  propose  to  do  what  was 
tantamount  to  the  entire  abolition  of  the  veto  power  in  the  constitution. 
And  although  they  then  recommended,  generally,  some  change  in  it, 
there  was  still  expressly  reserved,  and  to  be  left,  as  much  control  in 
the  executive  as  was  indispensable  to  avert  hasty  or  unconstitu- 
tional legislation. 

That  control  was  all  which  most  of  its  friends  ever  designed  to  effect 
by  the  present  veto.  It  is  also  the  only  control  which  ever  has  been 
exercised  under  it,  from  Washington  down  to  Tyler,  either  by  the 
Presidents  who  have  been  so  much  denounced,  or  by  others  who  have 
been  so  highly  commended. 

That  control,  in  my  opinion,  as  will  soon  be  explained  more  fully,  is 
not  left  by  the  proposed  amendment ;  and  hence  it  is  not  in  accordance 
even  with  the  doctrines  of  the  manifesto,  much  less  with  those  of  the 
eminent  statesmen  and  jurists  of  both  parties  in  politics  in  the  long  half- 
century  which  preceded  the  manifesto,  and  concurred,  in  all  emergen- 
cies, in  sustaining  its  fitness  and  usefulness.  The  elder  Adams  wrote 
a  treatise  to  illustrate  the  importance  of  checks  and  balances ;  and  Mar- 
shall and  Jay,  as  well  as  hundreds  of  others  of  the  Hamilton  school, — 
no  less  than  Madison,  Hancock,  Samuel  Adams,  and  a  host  in  the 
Jefferson  school, — defended  the  qualified  veto,  as  established  and  per- 
petuated to  the  present  moment.  Both  JeAY  and  Gentile  in  politics 
have  agreed  in  this. 

Though  some  exceptions  have  existed,  the  great  masses  of  both  par- 
ties have  always  approved  it ;  and  while  we  reverence  the  name  of 
one  above  all  parties,  and  in  respect  to  whose  memory  we  adjourned 
yesterday,  on  the  anniversary  of  his  birth,  we  may  well,  at  the  head 
of  all  the  authorities  in  favor  of  both  the  adoption  and  use  of  the  veto, 
cite  him, — him  who  reigns,  and,,  while  the  republic  lasts,  will,  I  trust, 


240  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER. 

continue  to  reign,  highest,  — first  in  war,  first  in  peace,  and  first  in 
the  hearts  of  his  comitrymen. 

All  the  long-acknowledged  principles  of  most  of  the  gentlemen  on 
the  other  side  of  the  House  tend,  also,  to  the  preservation,  and  even 
increase,  of  executive  power.  Have  they  not  always  befriended  a  strong 
executive  ?  Have  they  not  always  advocated  a  strong  government  1 
Have  they  not  argued  for  an  independent  executive  ? 

I  pass  over  other  matters  connected  with  precedent  and  party  prin- 
ciples bearing  on  this  question.  The  proposition  has  been  made, 
though  not  a  party  one,  and  we  must  meet  it.  The  senator  from 
Kentucky  (Mr.  Clay)  manfully  avows  that  he  has  made  it  on  his 
own  personal  views  and  pledges ;  and,  therefore,  not  emanating  from  a 
party,  and  not,  as  I  have  attempted  to  show,  agreeable  either  to  party 
principle  or  party  precedents.  I  trust,  then,  it  will  be  considered  and 
voted  on  free  from  party  excitement  or  party  discipline. 

This  is  a  fortunate  position  for  calm  inquiry,  and  I  shall,  therefore, 
hasten  to  examine  what  justification  there  may  be  for  disregarding  the 
great  array  of  time  and  authority  which  stands  in  favor  of  the  veto, 
and  for  introducing  so  hazardous  an  innovation  as  that  now  proposed 
for  its  virtual  destruction. 

Some  have  argued  that  the  present  veto  power  is  wrong  in  princi- 
ple ;  others  have  contended  that,  if  not  wrong  in  principle  originally, 
our  experience  during  the  last  half-century  shows  that  it  has  become 
wrong  to  retain  it  longer  in  practice. 

I  will  examine  both  of  these  positions ;  and,  first,  the  question  of  the 
original  propriety  of  the  veto  on  the  ground  of  principle. 

Looking  to  theory,  our  governments  are  not  founded  on  the  idea  of 
different  orders  or  estates,  to  be  consulted  and  represented,  as  is  the 
case  elsewhere,  and  therefore  a  check  or  veto  is  given  to  one  over 
another.  But  they  are  founded  on  the  theory  that  there  is  here  but 
one  order,  or  estate,  or  interest,  to  be  regarded,  and  that  this  one  con- 
sists of  the  people.  They  are  the  foundation  of  all, — the  superstructure 
and  the  ornament.  Whether  they  act  per  capita  in  the  choice  of  rep- 
resentatives, or  through  their  State  sovereignties  in  electing  senators, 
or  through  electors  combining  the  two  other  forms  in  the  appointment 
of  President,  it  is  still  their  action  behind  and  over  all,  as  well  as 
their  welfare  and  security,  which  are  the  end  and  object  of  all.  Why, 
then,  do  they  permit  a  veto  power  1  I  answer,  they  do  not  permit  it 
over  themselves.  Whenever  they  act  in  person,  and  in  primary  meet- 
ings, no  concurrent  body  is  required  to  assent,  or  allowed  to  dissent. 
No  veto  is  of  right  permitted  to  control  them,  from  any  human  source. 
In  such  action,  also,  bare  majorities  are  sufficient.  Otherwise,  there  is 
no  equality,  and  one  man  is  tolerated  in  being  more  in  natural  rights 
and  power  than  another.  This  condition  of  things,  which  some  in  this 
debate  have  stigmatized  as  a  mad  democracy,  is  the  true  philosophy 
of  our  system.  It  is  recognized  as  correct  by  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence ;  and  the  people  acknowledge  no  veto  or  negative  over  their 


IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER.  241 

operations,  but  what  they  may  themselves  choose  to  impose,  and  what 
intelligence,  morals,  and  religion,  impose  on  each  enlightened  and 
accountable  being. 

But  as  it  is  not  possible,  with  large  communities  like  ours,  scattered 
over  two  or  three  millions  of  square  miles  of  territory,  to  convene 
together  in  person  for  the  frequent  purposes  of  government,  the  people 
perform  most  of  those  purposes  by  representatives  or  agents  of  some 
kind. 

Here  lies  the  secret  and  argument  for  the  veto.  It  is  to  regulate 
and  check  those  agents  when  liable  and  likely  to  err,  and  not,  as  some 
senators  have  argued,  to  control  the  people  themselves.  It  is  to  help 
to  insure  accuracy,  skill,  and  fidelity  in  the  delegates  of  the  people, 
and  not  to  control  the  people.  It  is  chiefly  to  secure  the  latter  from 
effects  of  haste,  prejudice,  passion,  and  mistakes  of  all  kinds,  in  those 
whom,  on  the  representative  principle,  they  find  it  convenient  to 
employ ;  and  it  cannot  be  used  to  thwart  the  people  themselves,  or  to 
defeat  their  will.  It  is  not  and  cannot  here  be  applied  to  their  acts ; 
but  the  acts  only  of  their  agents.  So  far  from  the  veto  power  being, 
as  some  have  intimated,  an  illustration  of  the  will  of  the  nation  con- 
trolled by  the  will  of  one  ma?i,  it  shows  merely  the  will  of  one  set  of 
agents  for  the  nation  checked  and  delayed  by  the  will  of  another  set ; 
and  this  is  done,  not  against,  but  in  conformity  to,  the  will  of  the 
nation,  as  expressed  in  the  constitution  itself. 

The  great  guide,  in  delegating  power  by  the  people,  is  to  part  with 
no  more  than  is  necessary  to  insure  efficient  government,  and  to  divide 
what  is  parted  with  among  as  many  distinct  bodies  and  agents  as  are 
necessary  to  insure  skill  in  its  use,  and  under  as  many  checks  and 
balances  as  can  be  devised  to  prevent  any  abuse  of  the  power 
delegated.  One  of  those  checks  on  legislative  agents  is  the  veto  over 
them  intrusted  to  the  executive  agents.  But  other  checks  exist  on  the 
executive  and  judiciary  as  well  as  the  legislative  bodies,  and  are  all 
wise,  full  of  foresight,  and  indispensable  to  guard  the  people  from 
errors  committed  by  their  agents.  These  checks,  too,  wdiether  placed 
in  one  hand,  ten  or  a  thousand  hands,  are  still  not  checks  on  the 
people  themselves,  nor  independent  of  the  wish  and  will  of  the  nation, 
nor  hostile  to  its  interests.  Which  class  of  agents  best  agree  with  the 
views  of  the  people,  is  afterwards  to  be  settled  by  the  people  them- 
selves at  the  ballot-boxes,  when  the  term  of  office  expires,  under  our 
system  of  frequent  elections. 

The  check  of  a  short  tenure  of  office  is  something,  both  over  the 
legislative  and  executive.  The  check  of  impeachment  is  more,  over 
both  the  executive  and  the  judiciary.  The  check  of  the  assent  of  the 
Senate  to  all  treaties  and  important  appointments  is  still  more,  over 
the  executive,  and  the  concurrence  of  majorities  in  two  legislative 
bodies  before  any  act  can  pass  is  a  still  further  check  over  each  branch 
of  the  legislature.  So  is  the  right  claimed  to  instruct  agents  a  check 
over  some  j  so  was  the  right  to  remove  or  recall  agents,  at  any 
21 


242  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER. 

moment,  over  the  old  Confederation.  But,  in  almost  every  free  govern- 
ment in  the  world,  a  still  further  check  on  legislation  has  been  the 
power  of  either  an  absolute  or  qualified  veto  over  it,  exercised  by  a 
third  body,  consisting  of  a  few,  like  the  ephori  at  Sparta ;  or  one  or 
two,  like  the  tribunes  at  Rome ;  or  of  one,  like  our  own  President. 

This  tends  to  prevent  in  season  any  threatened  evil  from  legislative 
errors.  It  averts  the  wrong  before  the  fatal  blow  is  inflicted.  Where 
all  delegated  power  in  all  the  departments  of  the  government  is 
derived  from  the  people  in  different  ways,  one  department  is  as  much 
the  exponent  of  their  will,  in  the  matters  intrusted  to  it,  as  the  other ; 
and  when  they  differ  as  to  what  is  the  people's  will  radically,  is  it  not 
prudent  that  new  action  or  new  measures  should  be  postponed  till  the 
people,  by  new  elections,  can  themselves  speak  on  the  subject  1  This 
is  our  "mad  democracy,"  sneered  at  by  other  gentlemen.  Even 
Chief-justice  Marshall,  in  view  of  these  checks,  pronounced  our  gov- 
ernment a  iv ell-regulated  democracy.  And  though,  in  the  debate, 
ridicule  has  been  applied  to  this  idea,  and  to  the  democratic  derivation 
of  all  power  from  the  people,  yet  a  more  recent  authority  than  Mar- 
shall, and,  with  some  on  the  other  side,  quite  as  high  on  mere  politics, 


"  The  broad  foundation  on  which  our  constitution  rests  being  the  people, —  a  breath 
of  theirs  having  made,  as  a  breath  can  unmake,  change  or  modify  it, —  it  can  be 
assigned  to  none  of  the  great  divisions  of  government  but  to  that  of  democracy."  — 
General  Harrison's  Inaugural. 

It  is  "we  the  people,"  in  the  constitution  itself,  that  ordained  it; 
and  in  all  the  States  it  was  adopted  by  power  derived  from  the  people. 
It  was  from  the  people  of  Virginia,  the  people  of  New  Hampshire, 
the  people  of  Massachusetts,  and  so  on  through  the  whole ;  acting  in 
States,  I  admit,  but  still  the  people,  under,  around  and  above  all. 
Requiring  the  concurrence  of  two  legislative  bodies  in  passing  laws 
rests  on  this  same  sound  principle,  that  the  laws  are  more  likely  to  be 
right,  and  accord  with  the  views  of  the  people  and  the  constitution,  if 
two  examine  and  concur,  than  if  only  one  acted  on  the  subject.  On  a 
like  theory,  confirmed  by  all  experience,  the  concurrence  of  a  third  body, 
after  due  examination,  like  the  executive,  and  especially  where  he  is 
also  elected  by  the  people  and  amenable  to  them,  increases  the  security 
against  error  and  injury  to  the  community. 

You  might  as  wisely  move  to  abolish  the  first  as  the  last.  It  is 
treble  distillation,  or  refining  to  insure  more  purity  and  excellence.  It 
is  obtaining  all  lights  from  all  quarters.  All  constitutions  are,  like- 
wise, in  and  of  themselves  alone,  checks,  and  great  checks,  on  all 
departments.  But  they  are  only  parchment,  reaching  the  conscience, 
and  are  open  to  misconstruction ;  and  hence,  the  more  care  and 
restraint  by  different  bodies,  which  can  be  employed  in  legislating 
under  them,  are  the  better,  when  not  too  expensive  or  complicated. 
The  people  then  feel  safer.     They  sleep  in  more  quiet  from  aggres- 


IMPORTANCE    OF    THE   VETO    POWER.  243 

sion.  They  have  all  the  bolts  and  bars  practicable.  No  agents  are 
angels  or  Platos,  whether  legislative  or  executive  agents ;  and  no 
people  are  fit  for  self-government,  who  will  part  with  power  to  agents 
without  imposing  every  check  and  balance  on  them  which  is  calculated 
to  protect  the  community  from  mistakes  in  those  agents,  and  which 
experience  has  shown  to  be  salutary.  Even  Patrick  Henry,  though 
so  strenuously  opposed  to  the  present  constitution,  insisted  that  more 
checks  were  proper,  instead  of  there  being  too  many.     He  said  : 

"  In  the  British  government  there  are  real  checks  ;  —  in  this  system  there  are  only- 
ideal  balances.  Till  I  am  convinced  that  there  are  actual  efficient  checks,  I  will  not 
give  my  assent  to  its  establishment." 

Mr.  Jefferson  expressed  his  opposition  more  strongly  against  a  legis- 
lature without  proper  checks  than  an  executive,  because  it  substituted 
many  tyrants  for  one. 

All  the  best  writers  on  government  in  this  country,  since  the  able 
vindication  of  the  veto  power,  in  the  Federalist,  by  Hamilton,  Madison 
and  Jay, —  such  as  Kent  and  Story, — have  treated  it  with  high  com- 
mendation, both  in  its  theory  and  practice.  France,  in  her  charter  of 
1830,  has  returned  to  an  absolute  veto.  And  if  England,  after  the 
revolution,  has  seldom  witnessed  its  use,  because  resisted  by  the  Com- 
mons, on  account  of  its  being  in  hands  not  amenable  to  them,  yet  the 
executive  there,  in  its  power  to  dissolve  Parliament  if  attempting  dan- 
gerous laws,  and  its  power  over  the  House  of  Lords  in  the  appoint- 
ment of  its  members,  still  retains  indirectly  and  exercises  as  powerful 
a  weapon  to  defeat  legislation  as  any  veto,  however  unlimited. 

The  qualified  veto  exists  in  seventeen  of  our  State  constitutions,  and 
in  most  of  the  others  is  omitted  only  because  the  executive  is  there 
chosen  by  the  legislature,  and  hence  too  dependent  on  them  to  make 
the  power  of  any  use  in  his  hands.  Though  six  or  seven  of  the 
States  make  the  veto  power  less  extensive  than  in  the  constitution  of 
the  General  Government,  yet  they  substitute  for  it  a  shorter  term  of 
office  in  the  members  of  the  legislature,  and  hold  them  more  strictly 
amenable  to  instructions  from  their  constituents.  How  often  has  its 
use  been  most  salutary  in  many  of  the  States,  as  well  as  in  the 
General  Government !  But  I  omit  details  as  to  this,  which  other 
gentlemen  have  presented  fully  already. 

It  has  been  said,  and  that  well  and  truly,  by  an  eminent  jurist 
politically  attached  to  the  other  side,  that  the  more  frequent  use  of  the 
veto  in  both  governments  would  doubtless  have  been  better  for  the 
community.  Especially  might  most  concur  in  this,  when  looking  to 
the  millions  of  State  debts  and  myriads  of  broken  State  banks  which 
have  recently  covered  so  much  of  the  country  with  desolation,  under 
a  hasty  and  ill-advised  and  too  little  checked  system  of  State  legisla- 
tion. Those  States  that  have  escaped  may  well  rejoice  that  some 
checks  or  other,  more  efficient,  have  existed  among  them,  against  the 
vast  impulses  of  speculation  and  interest.     And  no  government  has 


244  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER. 

more  cause  for  thankfulness  than  this,  that  the  exercise  of  the  veto 
power  averted  from  it,  in  the  Maysville  road  case,  much  of  the  two 
hundred  millions  of  debt  which  afterwards  fell  elsewhere,  from  want  of 
the  existence  of  the  veto  there,  or  the  sagacity  and  fearlessness  to 
employ  it. 

But,  in  the  consideration  of  this  question,  as  to  the  expediency  of  a 
veto  power  in  our  system  of  government,  the  nature  and  extent  of  it, 
under  our  present  constitution,  have  been  misunderstood,  and  the  mis- 
take has  tended  to  render  this  power  more  dreaded  by  some,  and 
therefore  more  censured,  than  it  otherwise  would  have  been. 

It  has  been  denounced  as  a  one  man  power.  This  is  either  to 
prejudice  it  as  something  monarchical,  on  account  of  our  just  jealousy 
of  executive  influence,  or  it  rests  on  an  entire  misconception  of  its  true 
character.  Are  not  all  our  State  Governors  —  whether  the  powers 
intrusted  to  them  be  more  or  less  —  a  one  rnan  power  7  A  plural 
executive  has  long  since  been  exploded,  as  less  responsible  and  more 
dangerous.  Is  not  every  humble  justice  of  the  peace  a  one  rnan 
power  ?  —  every  sheriff,  marshal,  or  constable  ?  Are  not  district 
judges  a  one  man  power?  In  some  of  these  cases  the  authority 
given  to  the  one  man  is  limited,  in  others  an  appeal  lies  from  it,  and  in 
all  there  is  an  accountability  to  the  people  in  some  way  for  its  exer- 
cise. Hence  they  are  safe  as  human  trusts  can  be.  But  there  must 
be  some  such  trust,  or  there  can  be  no  representative  government 
whatever.  Such  is  the  case  of  the  veto  power  vested  in  the  executive 
by  our  constitution.  It  is  a  trust  limited,  and  for  and  from  the  peo- 
ple. It  is  exercised,  not  in  originating  laws,  but  merely  in  approving 
those  which  originate  elsewhere.  It  is  to  be  used  under  a  high  sense 
of  duty,  and  a  solemn  oath  to  support  the  constitution,  and  with  a 
view  only  to  the  public  welfare.  An  appeal  lies,  in  all  cases,  from  it  to 
the  legislature  itself;  and  if  two-thirds  of  the  members  concur,  the  veto 
is  virtually  reversed.  If  the  executive  misbehaves  in  its  use,  he  is 
not  only  liable  to  impeachment,  but  he  forfeits  public  confidence,  and 
endangers  not  only  his  private  character,  but  his  reelection  to  the  most 
elevated  station  in  the  republic.  If  not  thus  overruled,  it  can  be  by 
electing  new  and  different  members  of  the  legislature,  or  by  electing  a 
new  executive,  and  all  this  without  much  delay.  It  is  a  power  by 
which  no  existing  law  can  be  changed,  no  new  burden  imposed  on 
the  community,  no  new  office  created,  no  tax  levied  nor  money 
appropriated,  no  new  debt  incurred,  and  neither  peace  nor  war 
declared.  On  the  contrary,  it  tends  to  prevent  rashness  and  fickle- 
ness —  the  banes  of  republics. 

It  is  a  power  which  was  conferred  to  prevent  wrong,  not  to  do 
wrong.  It  is  one  intended  to  ward  off  a  violation  of  the  constitution, 
and  which  may  avert  most  ruinous  effects  from  haste,  inadvertence,  or 
corruption.  It  was  conferred  for  each  of  these  purposes,  as  well  as  to 
protect  the  executive  department  from  legislative  encroachment  and 
destruction.     These  are  material  purposes ;  and  some  of  the  reasoning 


IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER.  245 

on  the  other  side  has  not  been  entirely  fair,  which  has  represented  the 
protection  of  the  executive  authority  as  almost  its  sole  object.  Never 
yet  has  it  been  so  employed  during  our  whole  history ;  and  the  argu- 
ment by  the  senator  from  Kentucky  (Mr.  Morehead)  has  been  falla- 
cious, which  asked,  in  a  case  where  it  was  used  to  prevent  a  supposed 
breach  of  the  constitution,  whether  it  was  not  there  badly  used,  because 
there  had  been  no  haste  in  the  law  then  vetoed.  It  might  as  well 
have  been  asked  in  other  cases,  where  it  has  been  employed  to  prevent 
the  ill  effects  of  haste,  whether  it  was  not  badly  employed  there, 
because  in  those  cases  no  constitutional  question  arose.  It  can  and 
should  be  used  for  both  purposes,  or  either,  whenever  the  public  welfare 
appears  to  demand  it ;  and  it  has  truly  been  remarked,  that  so  pru- 
dent has  been  its  employment  as  never  to  have  been  overruled  by  a 
two-thirds  majority;  that  every  President  exercising  it  has  been 
reelected  hitherto,  and  no  one  has  failed  to  be  reelected  but  such  as 
never  used  it.  If  the  people  had  ever  been  really  dissatisfied  with  it, 
or  the  cases  in  which  it  had  been  applied,  how  quickly  would  it,  long 
ago,  have  been  swept  from  existence  by  those  who  control  our  whole 
system ! 

Passing  over  many  illustrations  adduced  on  this  point  by  others, 
very  little  is  the  injury  which  could  be  inflicted  by  a  reckless  execu- 
tive, in  using  the  veto  improperly.  Beside  impeachment,  and  refusal 
to  elect,  how  immediately  could  his  supplies  be  cut  off,  his  patronage 
cramped,  the  salaries  of  his  favorites  lessened,  or  their  offices  abol- 
ished !  It  is  used,  too,  by  the  will  and  direction  of  the  people,  instead 
of  being  independent  of  it.     They  may  truly  say, 

"  He  is  ours 
To  administer,  to  guard,  to  adorn  the  State, 
But  not  to  warp  or  change  it." 

It  is  used  by  an  officer  not  only  amenable  to  the  people,  and  virtu- 
ally appointed  by  them,  and  representing  them  as  explicitly  as  the 
legislature,  but  by  one  elected  through  votes  of  the  whole,  instead  of 
a  district  or  State  alone,  and  hence  less  liable  to  local  or  sectional 
feelings,  prejudices,  and  undue  influences.  It  is  used  by  an  officer* 
thus  situated,  much  more  likely  to  be  right  than  one  man,  making  a 
bare  majority,  in  this  House  or  the  other,  to  pass  a  bankrupt  or  some 
other  law, — and  that  in  contravention,  perhaps,  in  some  cases,  of  instruc- 
tions from  the  people, — or  than  a  bare  majority  of  one  in  the  highest 
judicial  tribunal,  and  on  the  greatest  and  gravest  questions  of  consti- 
tutional doubt.  It  is  used  by  an  officer  most  widely  known  and 
esteemed  for  talent  and  virtue,  who  acts  only  after  calmly  considering 
all  which  has  ever  been  said  and  done  by  others,  and  who  cannot  dis- 
sent without  setting  out  his  reasons  at  large,  for  the  whole  country  to 
scrutinize,  as  well  as  the  legislature,  and  who  risks,  in  using  it  improp- 
erly, both  fame  and  office.  In  using  it,  —  when  of  such  advanced 
age,  high  standing,  and  great  experience,  as  are  usually  associated  in 
21* 


246  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER. 

a  chief  magistrate,  —  he  is  less  likely  to  be  impulsive  or  passionate 
than  a  large  and  popular  body  of  men.  The  most  he  can  do  by  it  is 
to  keep  things  as  they  are  At  the  same  time,  he  cannot  make  it 
effective  even  to  prevent  legislation,  and  retain  matters  merely  as  they 
are,  unless  one-third  of  the  legislative  body  concur  with  him  in  his 
conclusions.  This  demonstrates  that  it  is  not  only  in  no  offensive  or 
aristocratical  sense  a  one  man  power,  but  is  in  no  sense  a  power  which 
is  exercised  solitary  and  alone  by  one  man.  In  assenting  to  a  law 
under  the  veto  power,  he  must  have  concurring  with  him  a  majority 
of  both  Houses,  or  his  assent  is  nugatory.  In  dissenting,  also,  by  its 
exercise,  he  must  have  one-third  of  the  legislature  concurring  with 
him,  or  his  dissent  is  nugatory. 

It  is,  therefore,  in  substance,  not  a  one  man  power,  but  a  power 
actually  exercised,  and  which  must  be  exercised,  in  conjunction  and 
concurrence  with  many  others,  or  it  becomes  void.  Others  are  asked 
by  it  merely  to  try  a  second  sober  thought,  under  calmer  circum- 
stances and  in  cooler  moments.  In  fine,  the  whole  essence  or  vitality 
of  the  power  is,  in  its  utmost  extent,  to  require  review  and  reconsid- 
eration in  others.  After  that,  it  exacts  only  a  majority  of  two-thirds 
of  the  legislature  to  pass  certain  laws,  instead  of  a  bare  majority :  and 
those  laws  such  as  the  executive,  another  agent  of  the  people  and  the 
States,  supposes  have,  by  haste  or  some  other  cause,  been  carried 
through  injudiciously. 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  acts  of  the  Houses  can  become  laws  in 
spite  of  him,  and  that  the  whole  war  against  the  veto  power  is  a  war 
by  one  class  of  delegates  from  the  people  against  the  people  them- 
selves, because  they  have  required  two-thirds  instead  of  a  bare  major- 
ity of  their  legislative  agents  to  unite  before  laws  shall  be  perfected 
in  doubtful  cases.  Is  this  war  not  rather  a  reflection  on  the  people, 
by  their  agents,  who  wage  it  ? 

Is  it  not  marvellous  modesty  in  an  attorney,  to  complain  that  his 
principal  does  not  choose  to  confide  more  power  to  him,  or  to  leave 
what  he  confides  without  a  check  or  concurrent  opinion  by  another 
attorney,  or  by  two  others  ?  The  principal  here,  the  people  and  the 
States,  deem  their  vital  interests  safer  with  a  double  or  treble  check 
over  their  delegates ;  and  is  it  fit  or  decorous  for  these  delegates  to 
complain  ?  The  people  are  willing  that  a  bare  majority  of  the  people 
themselves  should  control,  hi  their  primary  assemblies.  But  they 
may  prudently  refuse  to  be  controlled  by  their  own  agents,  unless  a 
majority  of  two-thirds  agree,  and  unless  two  or  three  kinds  of  those 
agents  concur.  This  is  wise  precaution,  and  not  oppression  nor  tyr- 
anny. How  absurd  to  pretend  that  this  course  is  derogatory  and  inju- 
rious to  the  people,  and  tends  to  control  the  will  of  the  nation  by  the 
will  of  one  man  ! 

Why,  sir,  our  own  constitution,  as  well  as  that  of  many  of  the 
States,  is  full  of  similar  provisions,  which  might,  on  principle,  be 
assailed  even  with  more  propriety  than  the  veto.      Do  you  not  per- 


IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER.  247 

ceive  that  this  very  amendment  now  under  consideration  cannot  suc- 
ceed, according  to  the  express  provisions  of  the  constitution,  unless 
two-thirds  of  the  legislature  are  in  favor  of  it  ?  and  even  three-fourths 
of  the  States  ?  Why  has  not  the  mover  proposed  to  abolish  that  two- 
thirds  or  three-fourths  requisition,  as  well  as  this  ? 

You  know,  also,  that  in  trials  of  impeachments,  by  the  same  consti- 
tution, the  respondent  cannot  be  convicted  without  a  majority  of  two- 
thirds  of  this  body  concur.  Why  does  not  the  mover  propose  to  amend 
that? 

Again,  sir,  by  the  same  constitution,  treaties  cannot  become  laws  of 
the  land  unless  two-thirds  of  the  Senate  agree  to  them.  Why  does 
not  the  learned  senator  (Mr.  Clay)  move  to  amend  that  provision 
also? 

In  some  cases  the  constitution  goes  still  further ;  and  the  equal 
representation  of  each  State  in  the  Senate  cannot  be  changed  by  an 
unanimous  vote  of  every  other  State,  and  of  both  Houses  in  Congress, 
unless  the  particular  State  in  interest  assents.  Will  he  not  next  pro- 
pose to  strike  out  that  provision  ?  So,  before  1808,  by  the  constitu- 
tion, no  vote,  however  unanimous,  could  pass  a  law  affecting  the 
importation  of  slaves.  So,  in  many  States,  similar  provisions  of  a 
two-thirds  or  three-fourths  vote,  in  agents  of  the  people,  is,  in  some 
important  cases,  explicitly  required. 

Look  to  New  York  as  to  corporations.  Look,  sir,  to  the  conven- 
tions of  the  several  States  which  adopted  our  present  constitution,  and 
you  will  find  numerous  instances  when  it  was  urged  to  extend  the 
two-thirds  principle  still  further  than  it  has  been  by  the  veto,  rather 
than  curtail  it  as  is  now  attempted. 

Here  they  are,  in  their  debates,  extending  to  votes  for  war,  votes 
to  make  loans,  votes  to  raise  troops,  votes  ceding  the  fisheries,  votes 
regulating  navigation  and  commerce,  votes  raising  direct  taxes. 

I  will  not  detain  the  Senate  by  further  specifications  concerning 
them. 

All  of  us  have  drawn,  with  our  earliest  breath,  the  right  to  a  trial 
by  jury.  It  is  secured  to  us  by  the  constitution,  as  the  palladium  of 
civil  liberty.  And  yet,  must  there  not  be  an  unanimous  vote  by  a 
jury  in  the  smallest  case  ?  Do  gentlemen  intend  to  abolish  that  ?  So 
the  common  law  courts  of  much  importance  have  each  four  judges. 
Why  ?  To  secure,  if  all  were  present,  a  vote  of  three  to  one  for  any 
decision ;  and  if  one  was  absent,  at  least  a  vote  of  two  to  one,  or  the 
very  two-thirds  provided  for  in  this  case  of  the  veto  power. 

I  pass  by  the  want  of  exact  proportions  even  in  primary  represent- 
ation in  the  other  House,  where  large  fractions  must  be  unrepre- 
sented. I  pass  by  the  three-fifths  representation  of  slaves  there,  as 
another  of  the  sacred  compromises  of  the  constitution.  I  pass  by  even 
the  enormous  inequality  of  numbers,  as  represented  in  the  Senate. 
Only  seventy  or  eighty  thousand  people  in  Delaware  have  as  much 
power,  through  their  State  authority,  in  this  body,  as  two  millions  in 


248  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER. 

New  York ;  or  one  voter  in  one  State  possesses  virtually  a  power  in 
the  Senate  equal  to  twenty-five  voters  in  another  State  ;  or  one  agent 
here,  by  our  check  on  the  bills  of  the  other  House,  has  a  power  in 
legislation  equal  to  five  in  the  other  House.  Is  this  disproportion  next 
to  be  assailed,  and  the  constitution  in  all  these  particulars  next  to  be 
prostrated  ? 

Far  be  it  from  me,  sir,  to  impute  any  such  revolutionary  designs  to 
any  who  have  supported  this  amendment.  But  do  not  the  elementary 
principles  they  advance  in  support  of  it  lead  inevitably  to  changes 
innumerable  and  vital  in  our  constitution,  and  perilous  to  all  our 
boasted  rights  and  liberties  under  it  1 

Away,  then,  with  this  course  of  reasoning  !  Away  with  the  idea 
that  our  fathers,  who  fought  against  monarchy,  approved  a  power  in 
the  constitution  which  is  either  monarchical  or  dangerous,  or  unsus- 
tained  by  the  soundest  analogies  and  reasons  in  the  history  of  all  ages, 
—  matters  which  they  had  widely  scrutinized,  and  on  which  they  had 
deeply  and  anxiously  reflected  ! 

While  this  power  was  used  by  Washington,  Madison,  and  Monroe, 
nobody  dreamed  that  it  was  wrong  in  the  abstract,  or  in  practice 
unwarrantable.  Nor  is  it  more  unwarrantable  now ;  but  only,  per- 
haps, more  an  obstacle  to  some  of  the  ill-advised  schemes  of  ambition, 
avarice,  or  speculation,  which  have  of  late  years  overwhelmed  so  many 
with  ruin  and  dismay.  It  is  not  vetoes,  but  vetoes  on  darling  meas- 
ures, —  vetoes  on  distribution,  internal  improvements,  and  banks,  all 
connected  with  the  absorbing  strides  of  the  monied  power,  —  which 
have  excited  so  much  hostility  and  condemnation.  A  veto  on  the  bill 
repealing  the  bankrupt  law,  during  this  session,  was  looked  forward 
to  with  exultation  by  many  who  denounced  its  use  in  the  other  cases. 
Grant,  then,  that  the  mover  of  the  amendment,  as  must  undoubtedly 
be  the  case,  is  free  from  all  motives  unworthy  his  station  and  charac- 
ter, in  making  the  proposition.  But  the  tendencies  of  it,  and  the 
arguments  for  it,  are  all  just  subjects  of  analysis  and  criticism,  and 
must  be  hung  up  to  such  reprobation  as  they  appear  to  deserve. 

Another  of  his  reasons  against  the  present  veto  power  is  its  sup- 
posed mixture  of  legislative  with  executive  duties.  In  reply  to  this, 
it  might  be  said,  that  so  far  as  he  retains  any  part  of  the  veto  in  his 
amendment,  as  he  professes  to  do,  the  same  mixture  is  continued  by 
himself.  In  the  next  place,  the  veto  is  not  a  legislative  power,  as 
arranged  under  our  constitution,  and  is  not,  therefore,  a  mixture  of 
legislative  with  executive  duties.  It  is  Roman,  and  not  English  or 
French,  in  its  origin.  It  is,  therefore,  tribunitian  or  plebeian,  rather 
than  legislative.  The  laws,  as  laws,  are  originated  and  perfected  with- 
out it.  The  executive  merely  affixes  his  assent,  as  a  tribune  for  the 
people,  or  withholds  it. 

But  the  law  is  made  elsewhere,  and  becomes,  in  spite  of  his  dissent, 
in  full  force,  if  two-thirds  of  the  legislature  are  subsequently  in  favor 
of  it. 


IMPORTANCE   OF  THE   VETO    POWER.  249 

Again :  were  all  this  otherwise,  and  were  the  power  legislative,  it 
is  no  violation  of  the  general  principle  separating  legislative,  executive, 
and  judicial  powers,  to  vest  this  in  the  executive.  They  are  still  sep- 
arated in  their  great  divisions  ;  but,  for  checks  and  balances  over  the 
agents  of  the  people,  and  not  over  the  people  themselves,  some  mixture 
is  made,  and  properly  made,  in  detail.  It  is  considered,  by  some  of 
the  wisest  statesmen  and  writers,  that  this,  so  far  from  being  a  deform- 
ity, or  an  argument  against  a  power  so  mixed,  —  if  the  veto  be  such 
an  one,  —  is  a  beauty,  a  guard,  an  excellence.  Are  we,  as  legislators, 
to  complain  of  such  a  mixture,  when  we  exercise  an  executive  power 
as  a  check  over  the  President,  in  stopping  all  his  treaties  and  all  his 
important  appointments,  if  we  dislike  them  ?  —  when  we  exercise,  also, 
judicial  powers,  in  trying  all  impeachments  ?  and,  when  the  other 
House  also  exercises  the  judicial  power  of  a  grand  inquest  in  respect 
to  political  offences,  and  the  power  also  of  prosecuting  attorney,  by  its 
own  members,  in  person,  in  case  of  impeachments  ?  But,  beyond  all 
this,  does  the  mover  complain  of  such  a  mixture  in  the  executive,  when 
he  himself  proposes,  in  another  amendment,  to  make  a  new  mixture  in 
legislative  duties,  by  devolving  on  the  two  Houses  the  executive  power 
of  appointing  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  and  Treasurer? 

Lastly,  as  to  the  rightfulness  of  the  present  veto  in  principle,  it  is 
argued  that  a  more  restricted  one,  allowing  a  bare  majority  to  pass  a 
law,  notwithstanding  the  dissent  of  the  executive,  would  prove  suf- 
ficient to  answer  the  design  of  this  power,  as  a  check  on  the  legisla- 
tive agents  of  the  people. 

But  the  senator  from  Virginia  (Mr.  Archer)  justly  remarked 
that  this  would,  in  practice,  prove  no  veto  at  all.  The  amendment, 
therefore,  in  such  a  form,  is  a  virtual  abolition  of  the  whole  power. 
Suppose  the  law  to  be  vetoed  is  an  encroachment  on  executive  privi- 
leges ;  will  it  not,  when  sent  back,  be  of  course  repassed  by  the  same 
bare  majority  who  at  first  intended  to  assail  him  ?  Suppose  the  law 
involves  a  constitutional  question,  which  was  fully  debated,  and  a  bare 
majority  voted  against  the  scruples  in  that  respect ;  would  not  the 
same  persons  repass  the  law,  if  sent  back  ?  So  of  a  bad  law,  passed 
through  corruption,  or  impulse.  I  admit  that  a  mistake  through 
haste,  in  a  law,  if  sent  back,  they  might  correct.  But  that  could  be 
corrected  by  a  new  law.  Thus,  every  important  and  vital  object  of 
the  veto  power  would  be  prostrated  by  a  change  like  that  contained  in 
this  amendment. 

Executive  independence,  constitutional  doubts,  stability  in  laws  and 
systems,  great  sectional  questions  in  a  small  minority,  would  all  bend 
before  it,  and  be  overwhelmed  in  one  common  ruin. 

If  an  executive,  under  such  circumstances,  stripped  of  all  direct 
check  on  the  error  of  erring  legislative  delegates,  should  be  driven  to 
the  greater  use  of  his  indirect  influence,  it  would  tend  to  practices 
truly  monarchical,  contaminating,  and  fatal  to  American  liberty  and 
virtue.     After  this  amendment,  there  would  be  less  of  the  veto  left 


250  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER. 

than  was  allowed  to  remain  even  in  the  first  stages  of  the  French  rev- 
olution; for  then  the  passage  of  the  law  vetoed  could  not  take  place  till 
two  successive  sessions  sanctioned  it.  And  when  thus  reduced,  what 
was  the  next  step  in  their  encroachments?  The  whole  was  swept  after 
it,  in  less  than  twelve  months.  Nothing  remained  to  check  the  excesses 
and  tyranny  of  legislative  aspirants,  till  the  entire  country  was  cov- 
ered with  confiscation  and  carnage. 

In  another  view,  still  different,  the  largest  veto  here  is  less  likely  to 
be  misused,  or  to  be  dangerous,  than  the  smallest  one  in  monarchies. 
Tor  there  the  different  departments  of  government  generally  represent 
different  interests,  and  are  either  jealous,  hostile,  or  encroaching,  for 
their  own  personal  benefit  and  aggrandizement. 

But  here  they  all  represent  only  one  interest, —  that  of  the  people. 
None  have  an  object  or  estate  separate  from  the  people ;  and  hence  the 
occasion  for  differences  will  be  less  frequent,  and,  when  they  do  occur, 
will  be  less  selfish,  and  therefore  more  entitled  to  weight,  respect, 
reconsideration,  and  delay,  unless  the  majorities  in  the  two  legislative 
bodies  are  quite  as  large  as  two-thirds. 

It  has  next  been  argued,  that,  though  the  qualified  veto  in  our  con- 
stitution may  have  been  proper  at  the  time  of  its  adoption,  circum- 
stances have  since  changed,  by  the  disproportionate  growth  of  the 
executive  power  over  the  legislative,  so  that  the  veto  ought  to  be  fur- 
ther reduced  or  annulled.  This  is  an  important  view  of  the  subject, 
and  I  will  endeavor  to  meet  it  in  frankness,  and  with  facts,  as  well  as 
general  principles,  calculated,  in  my  estimation,  to  demonstrate  the 
entire  fallacy  of  the  position. 

We  have  heard  repeated,  in  this  debate,  a  remark  which  originated 
with  Mr.  Dunning,  that  executive  power  had  increased,  is  increas- 
ing, and  ought  to  be  diminished.  Whether  this  is  correct  or  erro- 
neous, it  should  be  kept  in  mind  that  it  was  uttered  under  a  monarchy, 
with  an  executive  claiming  to  rule  by  Divine  right, —  not  amenable  to 
the  people, —  possessed  not  only  of  an  absolute  veto,  but  a  power  at 
any  time  to  defeat  any  law  by  a  dissolution  of  Parliament,  or  by 
appointing  additional  members  to  the  House  of  Lords, —  revered  as  the 
original  fountain  of  all  laws  as  well  as  honors,  and  acknowledged  as  an 
independent  permanent  third  estate  in  the  realm.  It  is  never,  as  a 
general  principle,  true  in  a  republic. 

Here,  executive  power  can  never  legitimately  increase  by  its  own 
operations,  except  as  the  growth  of  the  country  augments  the  business 
of  all  the  departments.  It  can  never  be  enlarged  disproportionately, 
except  to  carry  into  effect  the  plans  of  the  legislative  authority.  Here, 
the  executive  can  get  nothing  beyond  what  the  people  and  States  gave 
him  at  first,  unless  the  legislature,  under  this  enlargement  of  its  own 
influence  and  objects,  voluntarily  choose  to  confide  more  to  him,  for  its 
own  or  for  public  purposes.  Here,  also,  if  party  power  ever  becomes 
exclusive  and  absorbing,  it  is  developed  first  and  most  in  the  legisla- 


IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER.  251 

ture,  which  is  more  immediately  connected  with  the  people,  and  with 
party  machinery  and  party  impulses,  than  the  executive. 

Hence,  the  executive,  considered  alone,  is  here  almost  powerless. 
Instead  of  being  everything  and  doing  everything,  as  some  have  argued, 
it  is  manifest  that  here,  as  well  as  abroad,  his  influence  for  good  or 
evil  is  much  less  than  many  suppose. 

"  How  small,  of  all  that  human  hearts  endure, 
The  part  which  kings  or  laws  can  cause  or  cure  !" 

But  here  laws  do  almost  the  whole  which  can  be  done  by  the  Gen- 
eral Government,  either  to  advance  or  retard  the  influence  of  those 
other  great  and  active  agents  in  society  which  are  the  source  of  most 
of  its  weal  and  woe.  Hence,  the  legislature  here  is  made  the  depos- 
itory of  almost  every  important  power  delegated  by  the  people.  It 
makes  peace  and  war,  and  not  the  executive,  as  elsewhere.  It  helps, 
through  means  of  the  Senate,  to  make  all  treaties  and  important 
appointments  to  office  ;  and  not  the  executive  alone,  as  in  most  other 
countries.  It  can  pass  all  laws  in  despite  of  his  objections,  if  only 
two-thirds  of  the  members  concur  in  the  passage ;  and  not  the  execu- 
tive, as  in  both  England  and  France,  possessing  an  absolute  veto  over 
them  all.  It  is  invested  with  the  great  incidental  authority,  under  the 
constitution,  to  pass  laws  in  every  case  not  expressly  enumerated,  if 
necessary  and  proper  to  carry  into  effect  what  is  enumerated. 

But  the  executive  has  no  such  sweeping,  undefined,  grasping  author- 
ity, independent  of  the  legislature.  Even  many  parts  of  the  constitu- 
tion itself  cannot  be  enforced,  either  by  the  executive  or  the  judiciary, 
without  previous  legislation.  The  executive  power  is  tied  up  and 
hedged  around  in  almost  every  respect,  while  the  purse  and  the  sword, 
which  are  the  power  over  taxation  of  all  kinds,  with  that  of  raising 
armies  and  navies, —  officers,  high  and  low, —  all  depend  on  legislative 
action  either  for  existence  or  support,  and  in  most  cases  for  both.  He 
can  unite  in  no  law  but  with  them  and  their  previous  action.  He  can 
make  neither  treaty  nor  important  appointment  to  office,  without  the 
cooperation  of  one  of  the  Houses.  He  cannot  put  a  seaman  afloat,  or 
plant  a  soldier  in  the  field,  a  secretary  in  his  cabinet,  or  a  clerk  in  a 
custom-house,  or  even  buy  bread  and  meat  for  his  own  table  from  the 
public  revenue,  without  first  having  their  express  and  prior  sanction. 
He  is  but  one,  too,  among  millions ;  while,  on  the  contrary,  the  legis- 
lature is  numerous.  He  can  comparatively  have  but  few  connections 
or  intimates,  while  they  have  many,  and  are  in  constant  and  more  fre- 
quent intercourse  with  every  portion  of  the  community,  to  command 
popularity  from  the  great  sources  of  all  real  power  in  a  republic.  It 
is  hence  that  the  combined  talents,  intelligence,  wealth,  and  influence, 
of  the  legislature,  in  a  country  so  free  and  enterprising,  active  and 
aspiring,  as  this,  are  always  an  overmatch  for  a  single  executive,  and 
more  especially  one  thus  restricted  and  dependent. 

The  fashion  and  tendency  of  the  country  are,  for  the  legislature  to 


252  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER. 

crowd  the  executive  gradually  off  the  end  of  the  fallen  tree,  as 
Tecumseh  did  General  Harrison,  when  illustrating  how  the  white 
population  slowly  encroached  on  the  aborigines. 

From  such  a  spirit,  and  from  that  jealousy  which  is  in  itself  com- 
mendable, but  which  is  not  always  skilful,  the  executive  has,  in  several 
States,  become  a  mere  cipher. 

One  senator  (Mr.  Morehead)  has  complained,  in  this  debate,  that 
the  President  presumes  to  give  his  opinion  to  us  on  important  public 
questions.  Yet  the  constitution  and  his  oath  demand  this  duty  from 
him.  At  the  same  time,  it  has  been  amusing  to  witness,  in  two  other 
instances,  senators  on  the  same  side  of  the  House  (Messrs.  Clay 
and  Rives),  in  discussing  resolutions  calling  on  the  President  for 
papers,  resist  them,  because  they  indicated  too  prying,  too  inquisitive, 
or  too  intermeddling  a  spirit,  on  the  part  of  the  legislature,  with  what 
are  properly  executive  duties.  It  would  seem,  therefore,  that  in  fight- 
ing against  a  supposed  increase  of  executive  influence  here,  we  are 
fighting  the  air. 

But,  independent  of  all  reasoning  to  show  that  the  legislature  here 
is  much  the  most  powerful,  encroaching,  and  increasing,  even  in 
despite  of  the  veto  power,  let  us  advert  a  moment  to  the  opinions  of 
some  of  the  ablest  writers  and  statesmen  on  this  point.  They  are  of 
all  parties. 

Wilson  said,  in  discussing  the  checks  and  balances  in  the  constitu- 
tion (Debates,  p.  1330),  he  "  was  most  apprehensive  of  a  dissolution 
of  the  government  from  the  legislature  swallowing  up  all  the  other 
powers." 

G.  Morris  (p.  1165)  "  concurred  in  thinking  the  public  liberty  in 
greater  danger  from  legislative  usurpation  than  any  other  source." 

Madison  (p.  1163)  observed  that  "experience  in  all  States  has 
evinced  a  powerful  tendency  in  the  legislature  to  absorb  all  powers  in 
its  vortex."  —  u  This  was  the  real  source  of  danger  to  the  American 
constitutions." 

The  Federalist  —  Kent  and  Story  —  are  all  full  of  the  same  element- 
ary principle,  as  expressed  by  the  latter,  that  "  the  tendency  of  repub- 
lican government  is  to  the  aggrandizement  of  the  legislature  at  the 
expense  of  the  other  departments;"  or,  in  the  words  of  the  first, 
"  The  legislative  department  is  everywhere  extending  the  sphere  of  its 
activity,  and  drawing  all  forces  into  its  impetuous  vortex." 

Even  Mr.  Jefferson  denounced  an  unchecked  legislature,  or  a  con- 
centration of  all  power  in  it,  as  the  worst  of  tyrannies.  (Notes  on 
Virg,  p.  214.) 

Before  quitting  this  point,  and  in  order  to  prevent  misconception,  I 
would  observe  that  the  growth  of  legislative  power,  within  the  limits 
of  the  constitution,  and  without  encroachments  on  what  the  people  and 
the  States,  for  their  safety,  have  confided  to  other  departments,  has 
never  been  with  me  a  matter  of  regret.  It  is,  at  times,  evidence  of 
the  increase  of  intelligence,  talent,  and  enterprise,  among  the  members 


IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER.  253 

as  well  as  in  the  community  at  large.  It  conduces  to  the  general 
improvement  of  our  institutions  and  of  the  community,  and  is  not  only 
excited  by  much  of  what  advances  the  prosperity  of  the  country  and 
the  age  in  which  we  live,  but  in  some  degree  reacts  and  augments  the 
power  of  what  feeds  and  stimulates  it.  A  high  order  of  talent  and 
virtue  in  Congress,  long  experience  in  the  public  service,  and  great 
political  science,  must  and  should  command  due  influence  everywhere. 
Nor  am  I  one  of  those  who  cherish  no  jealousy  of  executive  power. 
I  would  check  and  restrain  it  with  care  in  our  constitution,  as  has  been 
done  by  our  fathers ;  and  I  would  afterwards  watch  its  operations  with 
argus  eyes,  in  order  to  detect  and  thwart  the  first  movements  violating 
those  constitutions.  This  natural  jealousy,  in  most  of  our  population, 
is  a  great  guaranty  that  abuses  will  seldom  be  attempted ;  and,  if 
attempted,  will  seldom  be  allowed  to  succeed.  But  far  be  it  from  any 
of  us  to  seek  to  defeat  the  constitutional  checks  and  balances  placed 
over  us  by  our  constituents,  for  their  security  and  their  welfare. 

The  only  remaining  apology  for  asking  them  to  take  from  the  exec- 
utive a  portion  of  his  power  controlling  us  is  this.  Notwithstanding 
all  theory  and  argument  show  the  legislature  in  a  republic  to  be  more 
increasing  and  encroaching  than  the  executive,  it  is  said  the  facts  devel- 
oped here  since  A.  D.  1789  show  that  the  latter  has  really  grown  the 
fastest  in  power,  and  must,  for  the  public  safety,  be  deprived  of  some 
of  its  privileges,  and  especially  of  the  present  veto  power. 

This  is  the  last,  and,  in  my  view,  most  important  position  which  has 
been  advanced.  It  has  met  with  least  attention  in  the  debate ;  but,  on 
a  scrutiny,  the  facts  will  be  found  to  operate  most  triumphantly  against 
those  who  assume  the  position. 

Look  at  our  legislative  history  impartially ;  select  not  two  cases 
only,  like  the  mover,  and  those  doubtful  in  character,  if  not  bearing 
against  him,  but  examine  a  host  which  exist  connected  with  the  sub- 
ject. I  shall  not  detain  the  Senate  with  a  collateral  inquiry,  which 
were  decided  right  and  which  wrong,  but  merely  allude  to  the  cases  as 
events  showing  the  instances  and  progress  of  legislative  influence  com- 
pared with  the  executive.  Having  heretofore  occupied  stations  in  both 
of  those  departments,  and  as  well  in  the  State  as  the  General  Govern- 
ment, I  am  in  a  situation  to  feel  impartial  between  the  two  rival  powers. 
I  do  not  contend  that  all,  in  either  branch  of  the  government,  are  saints, 
or  all  sinners ;  but  those  in  each  have  virtues  and  frailties  incident  to 
their  position  as  well  as  private  characters,  and  of  which  I  shall  ven- 
ture to  speak  with  that  freedom,  as  well  as  candor,  indispensable  in 
any  useful  inquiry  after  truth. 

One  of  the  first  measures  in  the  first  Congress,  under  the  new  con- 
stitution, was  to  organize  the  executive  departments.  Under  the  Con- 
federation, the  Secretaries  had,  in  analogy  to  what  exists  in  both  Eng- 
land and  France,  been  permitted  to  appear  in  person  before  Congress, 
and  make  explanations.  But,  in  the  new  arrangement,  such  was  the 
jealousy  lest  executive  influence  should  gain  some  advantage  over  the 
22 


254  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER. 

legislature  by  the  presence  of  its  agents,  that  none  of  the  Secretaries 
were  permitted  to  appear  on  the  floor  of  Congress,  and  only  the  Secre- 
tary connected  with  the  treasury  was  made  subject  to  attend  in  person 
when  desired.  It  is  another  curious  illustration  of  the  dread  of  execu- 
tive power,  and  the  stripping  it  in  this  way  of  any  opportunity  for 
personal  influence  over  Congress  in  public  discussions,  that  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury,  though  thus  made  liable  to  attend,  has,  in  the 
whole  fifty  years  since  elapsed,  never  been  once  called  before  the  leg- 
islature, and  enabled  in  person  to  vindicate  his  measures  and  repel 
unjust  attacks. 

Another  question  arose,  and  was  settled  in  the  organization  of  those 
departments,  which  shows  the  great  strides  since  of  legislative  claims 
over  the  executive.  It  was  long  and  most  ably  debated,  whether  the 
Secretaries  should  be  made  removable  by  the  President  alone,  or  only 
in  conjunction  with  and  by  the  assent  of  the  Senate.  The  decision 
was  solemnly  made  against  the  propriety  of  the  interference  of  this 
legislative  branch  of  the  government,  and  was  acquiesced  in  quietly 
and  practised  on  constantly  for  more  than  a  third  of  a  century. 

Yet,  of  late  years,  such  has  been  the  increase  of  legislative  claims 
over  the  executive,  rather  than  the  reverse,  that  a  continuance  to  make 
removals,  in  conformity  to  the  principle  of  that  decision,  has  been 
denounced  as  unconstitutional,  not  merely  by  partisan  presses  or  dis- 
appointed expectants,  but  by  grave  and  learned  senators,  and  the 
executive  has  been  hung  up  for  it  to  unmitigated  censure  and  scorn. 

Another  event  soon  occurred,  which  the  senator  from  Kentucky 
(Mr.  Clay)  adduced  as  a  proof  of  the  increase  of  executive  power, 
but  which,  in  truth,  gave  the  legislature  an  early  as  well  as  unex- 
pected power  over  all  nominations  to  office.  The  President  retired,  or 
was  driven  by  our  conduct,  from  appearing,  in  person,  in  this  chamber, 
to  procure  a  confirmation  of  his  appointments.  This  at  once  gave 
more  freedom  of  speech  and  inquiry  in  respect  to  them, — enabled  the 
Senate  to  use  greater  examination,  and  relieved  them  from  all  personal 
importunity  or  argument  from  the  executive.  It  thus  established  a  far 
greater  and  more  efficient  check  over  all  his  selections  for  office  than 
could  have  been  possible  under  the  previous  practice. 

The  next  important  development  of  the  increase  of  legislative  influ- 
ence was  also  in  this  body.  After  sitting  for  some  years  with  closed 
doors,  even  in  legislative  business,  and  thus  being,  in  public  apprecia- 
tion, little  more  than  a  council  of  review,  our  doings,  in  the  considera- 
tion of  laws,  after  strenuous  opposition,  were  flung  open  for  publicity 
and  discussion  before  the  people  and  the  world.  This  body  shot  for- 
ward at  once  in  power  and  popularity ;  and  wants  nothing  more,  but 
the  same  publicity  and  discussion  in  acting  on  appointments,  to  make  it 
a  still  more  formidable  check  in  appointments  than  it  now  is.  Should 
the  motion  of  my  friend  from  Ohio  (Mr.  Allen)  prevail  on  this  sub- 
ject, the  country  will  owe  him  a  deep  debt  of  gratitude,  not  only  for 
the  new  restraint  it  will  place  on  the  President,  but  for  the  check  it 


IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER.  255 

will  impose  on  the  worthless  harpies  that  fly  around  the  executive  for 
office,  and  who,  if  their  characters  and  claims  were  here  in  the  blaze 
of  day  to  undergo  public  examination  and  exposure,  would  often  shrink 
from  their  applications.  Thus  the  mode  of  administering  the  govern- 
ment is  almost  as  essential  to  preserve  a  due  balance  between  the  dif- 
ferent departments  as  the  express  provisions  of  the  constitution  itself. 
Another  shock  to  executive  influence,  and  at  the  same  time  an  increase 
of  legislative  power,  was  in  the  repeal  of  the  celebrated  judiciary  act. 
That  repeal  took  from  the  executive  a  power  to  reward  friends  with  an 
office  whose  tenure  was  good  behavior,  or  for  life,  and  asserted  the 
authority  of  the  legislature  to  shorten  the  term  to  a  year  or  less,  if  it 
pleased  at  any  moment  to  abolish  the  act  establishing  the  office. 

[Here  Mr.  Clay  inquired,  across  the  chamber,  if  that  decision  was 
wrong.] 

I  began  this  examination  of  occurrences  in  our  history  bearing  on 
the  comparative  increase  of  legislative  and  executive  power  by  stating 
explicitly  that  it  was  not  my  purpose  to  detain  the  Senate  by  arguing 
whether  the  decision,  in  any  case,  was  right  or  wrong.  I  merely  refer 
to  the  record,  and  to  the  manifest  character  and  tendency  of  the  deci- 
sion, whether  correct  or  incorrect,  to  prove  that  the  legislative,  rather 
than  the  executive  power,  has  augmented  greatly. 

But  what  have  we,  beside  all  these,  in  the  further  progress  of  our 
affairs  1  A  most  insidious  system  of  taxation  by  a  tariff.  It  looked  at 
first  only  to  revenue ;  and  manufactures,  like  other  interests,  came  in 
merely  for  incidental  protection,  and  that  under  a  low  rate  of  duties, 
from  twelve  and  a  half  to  thirty  per  cent.  Next,  it  gradually 
increased,  under  legislative  influence,  and  for  the  aggrandizement  of 
the  members  and  their  powerful  constituents,  to  a  deliberate  and  enor- 
mous protection,  for  manufactures  alone,  of  fifty,  eighty,  and  a  hun- 
dred per  cent.  It  thus  disturbed  so  fearfully  the  pursuits  of  the 
community,  and  deranged  so  greatly  the  employment  of  capital,  as,  with 
other  circumstances,  not  necessary  to  be  now  recapitulated,  to  break 
down  the  whole  system ;  but  only  to  be  revived  again  recently,  with 
the  new  and  tremendous  claim  of  a  legislative  right  to  increase  its  pop- 
ularity, by  giving  away,  through  distribution  acts,  immense  amounts 
of  the  public  revenue,  and  relieving  the  States,  to  some  extent,  from 
both  debt  and  direct  taxation. 

Next  in  our  history  came  the  system  of  internal  improvements.  At 
first,  a  cloud  in  the  horizon  no  bigger  than  a  man's  hand,  appropriat- 
ing six  or  eight  thousand  dollars  to  preserve  some  piers  in  the  Dela- 
ware river,  at  Newcastle,  it  in  time  rolled  onward,  expanding,  under 
legislative  impulses,  to  the  immense  aggregate  of  nearly  two  millions 
yearly.  One  member  urged  a  work  that  would  aid  his  city ;  another, 
his  State;  another,  perad venture,  his  own  local  interests;  another, 
doubtless,  the  public  convenience,  till  Congress  found  itself  wielding 
this  immense  influence  over  all  quarters  of  the  country,  by  a  system 
of  log-rolling  as  irresistible  as  it  was  unlimitable  and  ruinous.     When 


256  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER. 

the  executive  had  the  courage  and  independence  to  stem  the  torrent 
by  the  Maysville  veto,  and  thus  checked  many  extravagances,  the 
same  influences  rushed  into  State  legislatures,  soon  overwhelmed  many 
of  them  with  immense  debts,  and  has  now  burst  out  again  here,  by 
forcing  Congress  into  new  schemes  of  distribution  and  increased  tariffs, 
to  be,  in  many  cases,  similarly  wasted. 

Once  for  all,  it  may  be  added,  as  another  illustration  of  our  topic, 
that  neither  of  the  fatal  distribution  acts  of  1836  or  1841  could  ever 
have  been  passed  into  laws,  but  for  the  increased  and  increasing  power 
of  the  legislature.  Who  would  have  dared,  in  1790  or  1800,  or  even 
1810  or  1820,  to  propose  measures  like  those? 

"What  would  Gerry,  or  George  Clinton,  or  George  Mason,  have 
thought  of  a  proposition  to  bestow  on  the  States  all  the  large  revenue 
from  our  vast  public  domain,  and  resort  to  heavy  taxation  on  the 
people  to  supply  the  loss  of  it  ?  What  republican  would  have  dreamed 
of  giving  the  appropriation  of  our  money  to  a  different  government 
from  that  which  imposes  the  burdens  ?  Executive  influence  resisted 
and  retarded  this  destructive  course  for  years,  till,  at  last,  by  help  of 
the  concentrated  money  power  for  a  bank,  and  a  concentrated  money 
power  for  protection  to  manufactures,  the  legislature  has  triumphed, 
the  executive  has  been  revolutionized,  the  distribution  accomplished, 
the  tariff  compromise  proposed  to  be  violated,  and,  but  for  the  death 
of  the  late  incumbent,  all  executive  resistance  to  any  and  every  legisla- 
tive rashness  prostrated  in  the  dust. 

Who,  also,  but  the  legislature,  have  swollen  the  pension  system 
from  a  few  thousand  dollars,  at  first  contemplated,  to  many  millions  ? 
Who  are  the  agents,  and  who  are  thanked  and  sustained  for  the  vast 
sums  thus  expended  ?  Who,  but  the  legislature,  for  their  own  expan- 
sive plans  of  favor,  popularity,  or,  in  some  cases,  public  policy,  added, 
for  some  years,  from  ten  to  twenty  millions  to  the  aggregate  of  expend- 
itures asked  for  by  the  executive  ?  What  increase  of  influence  has 
grown  up  here  over  the  press,  by  the  enlargement  of  our  printing 
expenses'?  How  many  of  the  Indian  expenditures  have  also  been 
crowded  on  the  executive  by  the  legislature  ?  How  many  grants,  in 
private  claims,  much  more  acts  of  charity  or  generosity  than  justice, 
to  legislative  importunity  ?  How  much  of  the  light-house  system  ?  It 
has  been  increased  from  a  few  thousands  to  about  a  third  of  a  million 
of  dollars,  and  I  fear  there  is  no  limit  to  the  local  jobbing  and  local 
influences  connected  with  it.  How  many  thousands  of  State  expenses 
in  the  late  war,  incurred  not  only  without  our  authority,  but,  in  some 
cases,  in  contempt  of  it,  have  been  paid  out  of  the  national  treasury, 
under  the  pressure  of  legislative  importunity  ? 

If  the  executive,  in  some  of  these  cases,  selects  agents  to  expend  the 
money,  they  are  agents  recommended  by  members  of  Congress,  and 
both  the  expenditure  and  the  appointments  contribute  to  the  growth  of 
legislative  influence.  His  only  gain  is  that  of  more  labor  and  respons- 
ibility.   So,  if  millions  are  expended  on  forts  or  navy-yards,  the  patron- 


IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER.  257 

age  is  nominally  with  the  executive,  but  really  with  Congress ;  and 
the  local  increase  of  expenditure  is  sought  for  by  some  members  as  a 
most  desirable  boon,  for  the  profits  and  salaries  to  influential  friends, 
quite  as  much  as  for  patriotism. 

I  hasten  over  many  other  instances  of  the  increase  in  legislative 
power,  lest  being  too  tedious,  such  as  each  House  authorizing  clerks 
without  specific  laws ;  such  as  requiring  estimates  for  public  buildings 
to  be  first  submitted  to  a  House  committee ;  such  as  bestowing  double 
or  additional  compensations  on  our  officers,  in  the  teeth  of  a  provision 
controlling,  in  that  respect,  the  executive  departments ;  such  as  having 
increased  our  own  salaries  and  franking  privileges,  but  never  the  Pres- 
ident's :  and  such  as  having  officers  to  protect  this  chamber,  and  a 
police  to  guard  the  capitol,  but  not  a  solitary  individual  around  the 
President  to  shield  him  even  from  insult  or  outrage. 

But  one  moment  on  the  great  change  of  power  and  claims  evinced 
between  the  executive  and  legislative  branches  as  to  the  keeping  of  the 
public  money. 

In  1789,  a  law  passed,  as  a  matter  of  course,  confiding  the  custody 
of  the  public  money  to  the  executive.  It  wTas  to  be  kept  by  the  treas- 
urer, whom  the  President  appointed,  and  whom  he  could  remove. 
The  mere  keeping  of  it  in  safety  was,  in  its  nature,  a  ministerial  or  an 
executive  act.  It  conferred  no  increase  of  power,  but  only  an  increase 
of  liability  and  labor.  The  money  could  not  be  used  or  loaned  to  a 
single  dollar's  amount.  No  gain,  or  profit,  or  patronage,  belonged  to 
its  possession.  But  lately,  such  is  the  progress  of  legislative  claims 
and  power,  the  keeping  of  the  public  money  by  the  executive  has  been 
denounced  in  Congress  as  most  dangerous  to  public  liberty.  The 
mere  removal  of  it  from  one  depository  to  another,  though  under 
express  provision  in  the  law  or  charter  of  1816,  has  been  stigmatized 
as  usurpation,  and  the  executive  conduct  on  that  occasion  dragged 
hither  and  nailed  to  your  table  with  most  reproachful  condemnation. 
Even  his  wish  to  be  heard,  and  his  protest  against  the  attack  on  his 
good  name,  was  rejected  and  virtually  flung  under  your  table ;  and  his 
character,  without  hearing  or  trial,  was  sought  to  be  handed  down  to 
posterity,  on  our  official  records,  as  one  unfaithful  to  public  trusts  and 
a  violator  of  the  constitution  he  had  sworn  to  defend. 

Who  would  have  proposed  to  arraign  Washington  thus,  under  whose 
administration  the  places  of  deposit  for  the  public  money  were  fre- 
quently changed  by  the  executive?  Why  this  great  revolution  in 
legislative  feeling  and  action  on  this  particular  subject  1  Manifestly 
because,  in  the  mean  time,  powerful  individuals  have  been  permitted  to 
enjoy  temporary  loans  of  this  money  from  the  banks,  after  they  were 
selected  as  depositories, —  loans  which  our  own  officers  holding  it  could 
not  and  dared  not  make,  without  exposing  themselves  to  punishment. 

A  change  of  the  depository  might  compel  a  collection  of  the  loans, 
and  cut  off  future  favors  to  the  same  persons.     Did  not  much  of  the 
clamor  arise  from  this  ?     And  has  not  the  repeal  of  the  independent 
22* 


258  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER. 

treasury  been,  in  part,  the  result  of  the  like  determination  to  obtain 
the  use  of  the  public  money  by  similar  persons, —  members  of  Congress 
and  their  influential  friends, —  and  which  use  that  law  forbade  ?  Did 
not  some  similar  pecuniary  considerations,  in  similar  quarters,  enter 
into  the  reproaches  for  the  vetoes  against  internal  improvements  and 
the  distribution  bill?  Much  more  did  they  not  burst  out  at  the 
vetoes  of  the  bank  bills,  in  1832  and  1841? 

The  last  two  contained  a  singular  illustration  of  what  some  might 
consider  not  executive  but  legislative  grasping,  because  it  originated 
here,  and  was  negatived  by  the  President.  It  changed  the  location  of 
the  bank  from  a  great  commercial  city  to  this  capital,  where  the  mem- 
bers of  Congress  could,  if  disposed,  exercise  more  immediate  and  pow- 
erful influence ;  and,  at  the  same  moment,  after  long  debate,  the  bill 
passed  without  prohibiting  members  from  obtaining  loans. 

Let  me  invite  your  attention  next  to  two  great  changes  in  our  system 
of  credit  for  lands  and  duties,  which  have  stripped,  and  justly  stripped, 
the  executive  of  much  incidental  influence.  In  1820  over  twenty  mil- 
lions of  debt  for  the  former  was  under  his  discretionary  control  as  to 
its  collection,  and  at  all  times  for  the  latter  it  has.  been  from  ten  to 
twenty  millions  yearly.  Just  as  truly  as  it  is  said  in  Holy  Writ  that 
the  borrower  is  servant  to  the  lender,  just  so  truly  has  this  first  change 
deprived,  and  will  the  last  one  after  next  June  deprive,  the  executive, 
either  in  person  or  through  his  subordinates,  of  a  large  amount  of 
indirect  power. 

Not  to  detain  you  with  other  specific  measures,  showing  the  growth 
of  legislative  claims  and  legislative  power  on  the  one  hand,  and  of  the 
wane  of  executive  influence  on  the  other  hand,  let  me  add  that  the 
usages  of  the  government,  in  all  appointments  to  office,  from  the  lowest 
to  the  highest,  are  more  illustrative  of  the  truth  of  these  positions  than 
even  the  positive  enactments  of  Congress. 

Yes,  sir,  from  the  most  paltry  clerkship,  or  light-house  keeper,  or 
tide-waiter,  to  judges,  foreign  ministers,  and  cabinet  officers,  the  per- 
vading and  overwhelming  influence  of  the  legislature  has  been  hourly 
and  daily  felt  more  and  more. 

Go  to  the  files  in  the  departments, —  go  to  our  own :  whose  interfer- 
ence is  most  common?  whose  recommendations  are  most  powerful? 
whose  remonstrances,  when  overlooked,  are  most  indignant  ?  Members 
of  Congress,  most  assuredly.  I  stand  not  here  to  pass  judgment  on  this 
as  right  or  wrong ;  but  merely  to  bear  witness  to  the  fact,  and  its  con- 
sequences on  the  growth  of  legislative  influence  over  the  executive. 

Why,  sir,  the  whole  patronage  of  the  army  and  navy  is  almost 
absolutely  resigned  to  them.  They  virtually  make  the  selection  of 
cadets,  and  control  most  of  those  of  midshipmen.  Who  press,  also,  the 
increase,  and  decide  the  choice  of  pursers,  assistant-surgeons,  chaplains, 
and  the  marine  corps,  but  members  of  Congress  ?  And  why,  but  for 
this,  have  we,  in  the  very  last  year  alone,  as  appears  in  the  document 
before  me,  eleven  additional  pursers,  the  chaplains  nearly  doubled,  and 


IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER.  259 

the  higher  grades  of  officers  increased  to  make  way  for  new  ones 
at  the  bottom ;  so  that  the  post-captains  are  thirteen  more  than  at  the 
beginning  even  of  A.  D.  1841,  the  commanders  forty-one  more,  the 
surgeons  eleven,  the  lieutenants  forty  more,  and  the  passed  midshipmen 
and  midshipmen  one  hundred  and  twenty  more!  This  may  be  all 
right,  or  questionable,  or  wrong.  I  do  not  now  enter  into  those  con- 
siderations. But  who  have  been  gratified  by  it?  Who  have  urged 
and  controlled  most  of  the  new  appointments  ? 

Yet  this  is  not  all.  What  influence  but  the  legislature  compelled 
General  Harrison, — who  had  previously  denounced  the  appointment  of 
members  of  Congress  themselves  to  office,  as  one  of  the  amendments 
on  your  table  does, —  what  but  that  forced  him  to  select  four  out  of  six 
of  his  cabinet  from  those  very  members  of  Congress ;  and,  while  boast- 
ing that  he  would  act  as  President  of  the  country,  and  not  of  any 
party,  selecting  all  of  them  from  the  ranks  of  one  party  ?  I  cannot 
stop  now  to  trace  this  further  into  foreign  embassies,  judgeships,  and 
collectorships.  But  let  me  ask  if  the  legislature  have  not  assumed  for 
some  time  even  to  checkmate  the  appointment  of  the  executive  himself? 
Have  they  not  blackballed  him  in  a  legislative  caucus,  when  unmanage- 
able ?  or  recommended  another,  likely  to  be  more  complying  ?  And 
when  driven  from  these  halls  to  general  conventions,  have  not  the 
members  of  Congress,  in  many  cases,  been  members  of  those  conven- 
tions? And  did  not  some  of  them,  as  at  Harrisburg,  change  the 
nominee  for  President  by  their  all-controlling  influence  1 

Let  me  ask,  in  candor,  too,  if  the  whole  system  of  removals  from 
office  for  opinion's  sake,  so  much  denounced  formerly  by  those  who 
now  practise  it  most,  has  not  had  both  its  stimulus  and  sanction  in 
Congress  itself,  to  gratify  the  members  themselves,  or  their  active 
friends  ?  If  not  so,  why  are  not  those  removals  prevented  by  legisla- 
tion ?  And  why  is  a  President  sustained  at  this  moment,  or  why  was 
one  sustained  last  March,  who  daily  then  and  daily  now  turns  out 
worth  and  integrity  and  fidelity,  to  starve  or  beg  favors  of  a  cold  world, 
merely  to  reward  with  the  spoils  of  office  some  partisan  sycophant? 
There  have  been  quite  too  much  of  talk  and  pledges  on  this  point,  and 
quite  too  little  of  performance.  Above  all  this,  as  an  evidence  of 
legislative  interference  and  encroachment  on  the  executive,  have  not 
members  of  Congress,  even  the  loftiest,  taken  the  field  in  person 
against  him  ?  Have  they  not  assailed  him  in  season  and  out  of  season, 
at  dinners  and  jubilees,  on  the  stump  and  in  halls  of  legislation,  and 
on  the  Sabbath  as  well  as  week  days  ?  As  an  evidence  how  feeble  is 
his  power,  compared  with  theirs,  especially  when  theirs  is  reinforced 
by  that  vast  monied  influence  which  his  independence  and  vetoes  had 
disaffected,  did  they  not  mainly  drive  the  last  President  from  office  ? 
Did  they  not  substitute  another,  in  spite  of  all  the  imputed  increase  of 
executive  power,  and  that  other  disposed  to  gratify  this  monied  influ- 
ence by  internal  improvements  without  limit,  except  the  want  of  funds, 
by  distributions  lavishly  of  the  public  revenue,  and,  but  for  his  pre- 


260  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER. 

mature  death,  by  national  banks,  as  large,  gigantic,  omnipotent,  as  the 
most  latitudinar y  member  of  Congress  might  desire  1 

It  is  even  in  this  debate  admitted  (by  Mr.  Archer)  that,  after  all 
the  use  of  the  recent  vetoes  and  the  imaginary  growth  of  executive 
power,  the  present  President  is  not  able  to  command  a  single  vote 
here,  or  in  an  electoral  college,  nor  over  half  a  dozen  in  the  other 
House.  I  concede  that  the  change  in  the  constitution,  voting  for  a 
person  as  Vice-president  not  selected  originally  as  a  candidate  for 
President,  may  have  placed  in  the  executive  chair  one,  however 
amiable,  not  perhaps  of  the  same  weight  and  extensive  popularity  as 
would  have  been  there  had  the  constitution  not  been  altered.  I  see, 
also,  at  the  same  moment,  as  another  illustration  of  my  subject,  that 
unless,  by  a  happy  accident,  as  in  the  person  before  me  (Mr.  Cal- 
houn), and  one  other,  who  has  since  adorned  the  Presidency  itself 
(Mr.  Van  Buren),  the  executive  power  has  been  weakened  since  1804 
by  that  change,  and  especially  its  influence  in  and  over  this  body 
through  its  presiding  officer.  But  go  to  the  retired  veteran  of  the 
hermitage, —  a  President  by  nomination  as  well  as  election, —  a  Presi- 
dent in  mind,  experience,  courage,  constancy,  virtue,  popularity,  great- 
ness of  all  kinds,  and,  in  some  respects,  the  noblest  Roman  of  them 
all.  He  had  also  a  double  term, —  all  the  immense  increase  of  power 
which  the  gentlemen  have  argued  that  vetoes  confer, —  and  was  sur- 
rounded beside  with  all  the  halo,  so  dangerous,  as  some  apprehend,  of 
having  been  a  military  chieftain. 

Yet  what  was  he,  with  all  these  adventitious  aids  ?  Instead  of  wield- 
ing both  the  purse  and  the  sword,  he  could  not  impose  the  smallest 
tax,  or  use  a  dollar,  but  by  specific  assent  and  appropriation  of 
Congress.  He  could  not  enlist  or  pay  a  single  soldier  or  sailor,  till 
Congress  furnished  both  the  authority  and  means.  He  could  not 
employ  or  reward  a  single  follower,  except  as  the  legislature  permitted 
him.  In  the  height  .of  all  his  power  and  influence,  he  was  seldom,  if 
ever,  able  to  command  a  majority  in  both  branches  of  Congress  for  a 
whole  term.  And  when  he  retired  to  private  life,  as  quietly  and 
powerless,  after  all  his  vetoes,  as  the  humblest  of  our  constituents,  it 
has  been  a  taunt  against  him  that  he  cannot,  as  he  could  not  in  the 
height  of  his  glory  and  power,  control  an  election  even  in  his  own 
district.  I,  sir,  boast  of  this,  not  to  give  his  aged  bosom  a  pang,  but 
to  illustrate  the  purity  and  independence  of  my  countrymen,  and  as 
the  strongest  evidence  of  his  forbearance  and  patriotism.  It  repels, 
also,  this  whole  fallacy  about  the  increase  of  executive  influence.  Yes, 
it  is  most  true  and  convincing  that,  though  millions  of  hearts  beat  with 
gratitude  to  him  for  his  public  services,  and  millions  of  bayonets  are 
ready  to  defend  his  gray  hairs  from  insult  and  injustice,  yet  to  influ- 
ence improperly  a  single  election  he  has  neither  the  power  nor  incli- 
nation. He  could  not,  if  he  would ;  and,  thank  God,  he  would  not,  if 
he  could. 

It  must,  therefore,  be  manifest  that  the  executive  without  us  is  a 


IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER.  261 

mere  pageant.  He  is  a  mock  monarch,  in  whose  hands  we  place  the 
real  sceptre  or  withdraw  it,  and  make  it  a  broken  reed,  or  means  of 
defence  for  the  people  and  their  rights.  All  the  controlling,  absorbing, 
or  encroaching  powers,  are  with  the  legislature.  The  proximity  and 
intimacy  with  the  people  is  with  Congress,  while  the  President  is  more 
removed  from  them  in  his  intercourse.  Numbers  are  with  us,  also, 
being  over  fifty  in  one  branch,  and  near  two  hundred  and  fifty  in  the 
other,  to  him  alone ;  and  he  not  only  one  to  three  hundred,  but  to 
seventeen  millions  of  people,  more  near  and  more  ready,  usually,  to 
sustain  us  against  him.  We  have,  too,  talents,  intelligence,  experi- 
ence, quite  an  over-match  for  any  one  man  elsewhere ;  because  we 
have  not  only  the  most  intellectual,  aspiring,  and  popular,  among  the 
young  and  middle-aged,  but  ex-judges,  ex-governors,  ex-secretaries, 
ex- vice-presidents,  and  even  ex-presidents  themselves,  to  aid  us  with 
their  experience  and  influence. 

"  It  is  necessary,  then  (said  one  of  the  signers  of  the  constitution) ,  that  the  executive 
magistrate  should  be  the  guardian  of  the  people, —  even  of  the  lower  classes, —  against 
legislative  tyranny,  against  the  great  and  wealthy,  who,  in  the  course  of  things,  will 
necessarily  compose  the  legislative  body." 

Standing  in  this  attitude  towards  him,  it  excites  pity,  no  less  than 
regret,  that  an  attempt  should  be  made  to  rob  the  single  executive  of 
much  of  that  little  power  and  dignity  which  the  struggles  and  legis- 
lative victories  of  fifty  years  have  left  in  his  possession. 

What  should  we  say  of  him,  were  he  to  turn  round  and  urge  that 
some  of  our  powers  or  checks  over  him  should  be  removed  or  lessened? 
The  scorn  and  indignation  which  would,  in  such  case,  assail  him,  is 
another  illustration  how  feeble  he  already  is  in  influence  compared 
with  us. 

In  fine,  sir,  the  whole  fallacy  of  the  argument  will  be  more  apparent, 
if  we  look  nakedly  at  a  few  of  its  assumptions.  First,  the  veto  is 
desired  to  be  changed  because  executive  power  has  greatly  increased, 
when  the  facts  in  our  history  from  all  quarters,  as  well  as  the  nature 
and  tendency  of  legislative  influence  in  free  countries,  show  the  exact 
reverse. 

Next,  if  the  executive  has  not  increased  in  power  separately,  it  is 
contended  that  he  has  as  the  great  agent  and  exponent  of  a  party,  and 
therefore  that  the  veto  must  be  taken  away.  When,  if  such  be  the 
truth,  are  not  the  active,  influential,  and  controlling  members  of  party, 
members  of  Congress,  and  closely  connected  with  them  ?  And  must 
not  the  executive,  thus  situated,  so  far  from  being  likely  to  check  our 
acts  too  often  or  improperly,  be  likely  not  to  check  them  enough  ? 

Next,  if  he  has,  under  a  high  sense  of  duty,  and  bursting  away  from 
party  trammels  or  legislative  influence,  ever  used  the  veto  against  us, 
is  it  not  right,  and  the  will  of  the  nation,  of  the  people,  and  for  the 
public  welfare,  that  he  should  thus  use  it?  If  it  be  not,  let  us  have 
specified  the  particular  instance  of  any  veto  which  any  member  of  this 


262  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER. 

body  of  the  political  school  of  1798  will  contend  to  be  wrong ;  or  any 
one,  where  the  people,  in  the  next  election  after  its  use,  have  not 
indirectly  and  constructively  approved  it. 

In  every  instance  they  have  reelected  the  President  who  has  used 
it ;  and  it  is  insanity  to  suppose  the  power  will  ever  be  wilfully  abused 
by  one  illustrious  for  public  services  over  the  whole  Union  before  he 
can  be  elected,  and  who,  without  a  hope  of  gain  or  fame  by  such  an 
abuse,  would  suddenly  abandon  his  integrity,  forfeit  reputation,  embit- 
ter future  life,  disgrace  his  friends,  and  stain,  with  a  sacrilegious  hand, 
his  own  and  his  country's  history.  In  short,  one  of  the  distinguished 
jurists  of  the  age,  and,  at  the  same  time,  a  politician  acting  with  the 
other  side  of  this  chamber,  has,  in  the  calm  of  his  closet,  in  a  work 
well  known  and  before  me,  deliberately  stated  to  posterity  his  convic- 
tion, that  if,  between  the  different  departments,  there  has  been  any 
increase  or  encroachment,  it  has  not  been  on  the  part  of  either  the 
executive  or  the  judiciary. 

But  it  may  be  apprehended  that  exceptions  will  occur  to  all  this 
general  reasoning  and  facts,  and  then,  at  times,  the  country  may  suffer 
by  a  misuse  of  the  present  veto.  Though  this  must  be  almost  a  case 
of  fancy,  considering  that  the  veto  power  changes  nothing,  but  merely 
delays,  yet  there  are  other  constitutional  and  effective  means,  already 
existing,  to  obviate  any  evil  consequences  in  such  a  case,  without 
amending  the  constitution.  First,  if  two-thirds  of  both  houses  are 
satisfied  that  the  consequences  of  any  particular  veto  are  likely  to  be 
injurious,  they  can  and  will  at  once  overrule  it.  If  so  many  are  not 
thus  satisfied,  the  danger  is  probably  not  very  clear  or  great.  But, 
whatever  it  may  be,  another  remedy  exists  in  one  year,  if  at  the  close 
of  a  Congress,  or  two  years  at  the  furthest.  Then  all  of  the  other 
House  may  be  changed,  and  one-third  of  the  Senate,  and  a  new  law, 
like  that  vetoed,  may  be  passed  by  a  two-thirds  majority.  If  that  rem- 
edy fails,  there  is  still  another.  The  President  himself  can  be  changed, 
in  one  year,  perhaps,  or  two,  and  certainly  in  four,  so  as  to  insure  suc- 
cess with  the  same  law,  even  without  a  majority  of  two-thirds.  Nor  is 
this  mere  theory.  We  have  just  witnessed  a  case  of  this  kind  as  to 
the  executive,  effected  by  what  means  except  and  in  addition  to  legis- 
lative influence  I  shall  not  now  stop  to  examine.  A  civil  revolution 
in  the  executive,  for  the  first  time  in  the  nineteenth  century,  by  a  pop- 
ular election,  has  just  been  accomplished,  in  favor  of  the  broad  con- 
struction of  the  constitution  ;  and  the  unlimited  doctrines  of  the  gen- 
eral welfare,  and  those  monied  measures  which  legislative  influence 
had  attempted,  but  by  executive  vetoes  had  been  thwarted  in  accom- 
plishing,—  such  as  United  States  banks,  distributions  of  the  public 
lands,  and  unlimited  internal  improvements, —  have  all  but  one  been 
perfected,  without  changing  the  constitution,  and  in  despite  of  former 
vetoes. 

The  failure  of  that  one  only  was  in  consequence  of  a  lamented  event 
in  the  hands  of  Providence  alone,  and  to  which  allusion  has  been 


IMPORTANCE   OF  THE  VETO   POWER.  263 

already  made ;  but  that  failure  it  would  be  madness  to  attempt  now  to 
remedy,  by  a  rash  prostration  of  all  constitutional  barriers  to  passion, 
indiscretion,  or  faction. 

Nor  was  this  amendment  the  remedy  proposed  in  1827,  with  a  view 
to  curtail  executive  influence.  It  was  then  proposed  to  accomplish 
that  under  express  laws  and  other  amendments  to  lessen  executive 
patronage  through  appointments,  &c,  and  much  of  which  has  since  been 
indirectly  accomplished, —  some  by  new  laws  and  some  without  them, 
—  through  the  mere  force  of  Congressional  influence.  That  can  be 
pushed  still  further  now,  as  it  might  then,  by  legislation  only, — 
reducing  salaries,  and  abolishing  unnecessary  offices, —  if  it  should  be 
supposed  that  such  a  measure  is  required  by  the  public  welfare,  or  is 
necessary  to  check  existing  abuses  in  executive  favors.  Such  a  course 
is  safe,  constitutional,  legitimate,  and  may  prove  often  a  great  preserv- 
ative of  public  liberty. 

In  that  way,  the  House  of  Commons,  after  the  revolution  in  Eng- 
land, brought  their  new  monarch,  popular  and  talented  as  he  really 
was,  to  reasonable  terms ;  and  this  without  robbing  him  of  the  veto 
power,  or  its  exercise,  when  found  necessary,  or  when  the  same  results 
could  not  be  accomplished  by  him  through  other  checks  and  balances 
more  formidable  than  that.  One  member  boasted  "that  they  had 
brought  the  king's  nose  to  the  grindstone,  and  in  another  session  they 
would  make  him  leap  over  a  stick."  But  they  wisely  refrained  from 
prostrating  any  of  the  constitutional  powers  of  their  executive,  as  I 
trust  we  shall  any  of  our  much  more  feeble  and  more  accountable 
chief  magistrate. 

The  natural,  active,  and  irresistible  influence  of  the  legislature  in  a 
free  government,  and  its  inroads  on  executive  power,  are  such,  that 
the  latter  needs  all  its  clear  authority,  if  not  a  reinforcement  of  it,  to 
prevent  gradual  encroachment  and  decay,  with  ultimate  imbecility  and 
ruin.  When  these  come,  what  follows  ?  What  does  the  history  of 
all  free  governments  demonstrate  as  to  which  triumphs,  and  as  to  the 
consequences  ?  Not  that  the  increase  of  executive  power  ripens  into 
despotism,  but  the  gradual  destruction  of  it  by  the  legislature ;  not 
that  the  executive  pushes  forward,  but,  being  overcome,  a  despotism  is 
afterwards  introduced,  either  by  the  legislature  or  the  military,  to  pre- 
vent further  anarchy,  bloodshed,  and  utter  insecurity  of  property  and 
life.  In  all  cases  the  legislature  first  conquered  the  executive,  rather 
than  he  them.  Was  it  the  executive,  or  the  tribunes  with  the  veto 
power,  who  encroached  on  the  legislature,  and  introduced  the  tyranny 
of  the  Caesars  ?  No.  It  was  the  Senate  —  the  legislature  —  exciting 
tumults  against  those  holding  the  veto  power ;  and,  in  the  rage  of 
disappointment,  some  of  them  in  person  uniting  to  murder  the  Gracchi, 
in  order  to  defeat  the  use  of  the  veto.  Anarchy  followed  on  these 
legislative  encroachments,  till  usurpation  and  despotism  came  in  and 
extirpated  every  vestige  of  liberty.  Was  it  the  executive  that  by 
encroachment  destroyed  the  legislative  department  in  England,  in  the 


264  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER. 

seventeenth  century,  or  was  it  not  rather  the  latter  which  brought  the 
former  to  the  block ;  and  next,  by  the  help  of  the  army,  pushed  for- 
ward a  real  military  chieftain,  in  Cromwell,  with  sword  in  hand,  and 
purse  at  command,  to  absolute  dominion  ?  Who  encroached  in  France, 
and  then  established  an  inexorable  despotism,  in  the  iron  sway  of 
Bonaparte  ?  It  was  the  National  Assembly  —  the  legislature  —  which 
rode  over  all  checks  and  balances,  and  beheaded  Louis  the  Sixteenth. 

It  was  the  legislature  there  that  first  lessened  the  veto,  though  not 
so  far  as  now  proposed  by  this  amendment ;  who  next  abolished  it 
entirely :  next  destroyed  both  the  executive  and  the  peerage ;  assumed 
all  powers,  legislative,  executive,  and  judicial ;  and  finally  covered  the 
most  beautiful  country  of  Europe  with  pillage  and  murder.  They 
hastened  to  drag  youth,  loveliness,  talent,  and  virtue,  to  the  guillotine ; 
filled  the  prisons  with  gray  hairs,  and  hung  at  the  lamp-posts  all  that 
was  pure  and  holy  in  religion.  The  bloodiest  scenes  in  romance  or 
tragedy  fall  far  short,  in  horrors,  of  the  unembellished  consequences  of 
those  legislative  encroachments. 

I  was  not  a  little  struck  with  astonishment  that  the  course  of  France, 
in  respect  to  the  veto,  was  alluded  to  by  the  mover  as  a  precedent  for 
us.  Such  consequences  as  there  ensued  it  is  not  possible  that  he  can 
either  intend  or  anticipate  here.  But  whither  does  the  destruction  of 
one  restraint,  in  government,  on  human  ambition  or  human  passion, 
tend?  To  the  prostration  of  all  restraints.  When  the  balance  is 
destroyed,  and  more  especially,  not  by  taking  merely  from  one  side, 
but  putting  into  the  other,  one  beam  kicks  the  skies  with  accelerated 
speed.  Remove  one  check  or  guard  of  the  machine,  in  a  steam-engine 
in  full  motion,  and  not  only  that  guard  is  lost  or  destroyed,  but  the 
whole  machine  is  dashed  into  ruins.  Whatever  is,  by  this  amendment, 
torn  from  the  executive,  is  not  restored  to  the  people  or  the  States,  or 
invested  in  a  separate  independent  officer,  like  a  tribune  ;  but  it  is  vir- 
tually conferred  on  the  legislature,  already  too  powerful  and  encroach- 
ing ;  —  and  thus,  as  was  said  in  the  first  debates  in  Congress  after  the 
adoption  of  the  constitution,  "if  you  take  away  the  powers  from  one 
branch  of  the  government  and  give  them  to  another,  there  is  an  end 
of  liberty." 

The  great  security,  as  we  have  already  shown,  is  to  divide  and 
check  delegated  power,  rather  than  concentrate  and  leave  it  more 
unchecked,  as  this  amendment  proposes.  When  divided,  patriotism 
and  talent  are  mutually  vigilant  and  useful  in  reaching  proper  results ; 
and  if  a  want  of  them  influence  one  branch,  it  is  checked  and  cor- 
rected in  the  other.  But  if  unworthiness  and  infidelity  to  duty  creep 
into  different  branches,  instead  of  being  concentrated  in  one,  acting 
alone  and  fatally,  it  is  less  dangerous,  because  divided,  jealous,  or 
hostile ;  and  interest  in  one  counteracts  interest  in  the  other,  ambition 
here  defeats  ambition  there,  faction  foils  faction,  and  revenge,  revenge. 

Mr.  Jefferson  justly  said  (Notes  on  Virg.,  p.  214)  : 


IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  VETO  POWER.  265 

"An  elective  despotism  (a  mere  legislative  power)  was  not  the  government  we 
fought  for;  but  one  which  should  not  only  be  founded  on  free  principles,  but  in  which 
the  powers  of  government  should  be  so  divided  and  balanced,  among  several  bodies 
of  magistracy,  as  that  no  one  could  transcend  their  legal  limits,  without  being  effect- 
ually checked  and  restrained  by  the  others." 

In  the  volumes  near  me,  sir,  are  numerous  other  grave  warnings  on 
this  subject ;  but  I  forbear  detaining  the  Senate. 

Unless  this  division  of  powers  is  sacredly  preserved,  the  next  victim 
will  be  the  smaller  branch  of  the  legislature,  prostrated  before  the 
most  numerous  one.  Such  was  the  progress  in  England,  as  well  as 
France.  Make  the  present  amendment,  and  the  abolition  of  the  Sen- 
ate, by  another,  will  be,  ere  long,  proposed,  on  the  same  fallacious  rea- 
soning as  this.  The  Senate  will  be  denounced,  as  not  organized  on 
bare  majorities, —  as  a  less  equal  and  less  full  exponent  of  the  nation? s 
will;  and  because  the  more  immediate  and  numerous  representatives 
of  the  people  should  not  be  controlled  by  such  a  one  man  or  fifty 
man  power. 

The  qualified  veto,  in  a  limited  executive  like  ours,  is  a  power  con- 
ferred by  the  people, —  popular  with  the  people,  and  formidable  only 
to  legislative  tyranny.  A  legislative  despotism,  unchecked,  and  in 
which  most  or  all  power  is  concentrated,  is  most  dangerous,  as  it 
gives  hundreds  of  tyrants  instead  of  one,  or  allows  some  less  scrupu- 
lous demagogue,  like  Robespierre,  to  become  the  true  one  man  power 
over  the  rest,  which  is  always  the  most  fearful  and  atrocious.  That  is 
the  real  one  man  power  which,  half  a  century  ago,  talked,  in  strains 
since  revived,  of  the  will  of  the  nation  being  controlled  by  the  will 
of  one  m>an.  It  was  such  a  one  man  power  that  taunted  the  feeble 
Louis  with  defeating  the  will  of  the  nation,  but  whose  colleagues  in 
the  legislature,  for  the  preservation  of  their  own  lives  from  the  guil- 
lotine, and  their  property  from  plunder  and  confiscation,  were  at  last 
obliged  to  assassinate  him  in  self-defence. 

The  constitution  here  shows  how  the  will  of  the  nation  is  to  be 
expressed  and  represented.  The  constitution  allows  none  of  its  dele- 
gates to  violate  that  will,  without  furnishing  redress  in  a  constitutional 
mode.  The  constitution  makes  one  set  of  its  delegates  to  represent 
and  speak  that  will,  as  well  as  another  set ;  and,  for  the  safety  of  the 
people  and  the  States  against  error  in  all  their  delegates,  requires,  and 
has  a  right  to  require,  a  concurrent  opinion  of  them  all  in  what  they 
do,  or  of  a  majority  of  them  so  large  as  to  obviate  the  probability  of 
wrong.  Thus,  no  one  man  alone  does  or  can,  under  the  constitution, 
represent  their  will,  speak  their  will,  or  control  their  will ;  but  all  con- 
joined, or  in  some  other  conservative  manner  prescribed  in  the  instru- 
ment. I,  for  one,  am  unwilling  that  this  constitution  should  be 
changed ;  and  much  less  so,  until  the  people,  or  the  States,  first  inter- 
fere and  require  an  amendment. 

To  us,  as  to  their  agents  and  servants,  it  should  be  a  political  Bible. 
It  is  wise  almost  to  inspiration.  It  is  the  revealed  will  of  the  people 
23 


266  TARIFF. 

and  the  States  to  their  delegates.  It  is  worthy  of  a  corresponding 
reverence ;  and  I  would  almost  as  soon  attempt  to  amend  the  Gospel 
of  Jesus,  as  amend  this  sacred  charter  of  our  liberties. 


TAKIFF* 


I  ASK  the  indulgence  of  the  Senate  to  the  consideration  of  a  few 
objections  to  the  general  character  of  this  bill,  before  taking  up  the 
amendments  in  detail.  Being  one  of  the  Committee  on  Finance 
opposed  to  its  passage,  I  am  requested,  by  several  friends  near  me,  to 
state  the  grounds  of  those  objections  now,  as  they  may  throw  some 
light  on  the  propriety  of  adopting  or  rejecting  many  of  the  amend- 
ments. Those  grounds  are  two-fold :  first,  as  to  the  amount  of  the 
tax  imposed ;  and,  next,  as  to  the  manner  of  imposing  it.  The  amount 
proposed  to  be  collected  is  believed  to  be  unnecessarily  large,  and  the 
manner  of  assessing  it  is  so  unequal  and  oppressive  as  to  be  equiva- 
lent, in  many  cases,  to  an  odious  poll-tax.  There  can  be  little  doubt 
concerning  either  of  these  positions,  if  the  facts  are  carefully  exam- 
ined. The  sum  sought  to  be  raised  is  the  enormous  one  of  thirty-two 
millions  of  dollars.  This  is  the  gross  amount,  leaving  twenty-seven 
millions  net.  It  is  increased  near  ten  per  cent,  more  to  the  consumer 
by  the  cash  duties;  and  still  further  by  another  ten  per  cent.,  when- 
ever the  imports  are  in  foreign  vessels,  not  entitled  to  any  treaty  priv- 
ileges. The  burden  on  the  community  will  thus,  in  its  mildest  form, 
equal  an  average  of  quite  two  dollars  per  head  to  every  man,  woman, 
and  child,  throughout  the  Union.  In  those  quarters  which  manufac- 
ture least,  the  tax  will  be  still  heavier  in  proportion ;  and  more  espe- 
cially will  it  be  so  in  the  Atlantic  States,  where  the  people  consume  a 
larger  share  than  elsewhere  of  what  is  imported  from  abroad.  Indeed, 
sir,  the  burden  is  larger  than  all  the  other  money  taxes,  State,  county, 
and  town,  combined ;  for  they  all  are  supposed  not  to  exceed,  if  they 
equal,  two  dollars  per  head.  It  is  more  than  double  the  average 
expenses  of  the  General  Government  annually,  since  its  foundation, 
including  even  quasi  French  wars,  the  last  war  with  England,  and  all 

*  A  speech  on  the  Tariff  Bill ;  delivered  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  July 
20, 1842. 


TARIFF.  267 

our  numerous  Indian  wars.  It  does  not  lessen  this  burden  to  call  it  a 
tariff.  The  collection  of  duties  from  customs  is  a  tax,  though  under 
the  disguise  of  "a  tariff,"  as  much  as  a  collection  of  revenue  from  any 
other  property.  Taxation  of  any  kind,  and  to  any  extent,  is  also  an 
evil ;  —  sometimes,  I  admit,  a  necessary  evil ;  but  still  an  evil,  and 
instinctively  sought  to  be  avoided  or  lessened  by  all  people,  in  all  ages. 
It  has  justly  been  called  the  great  censorium  of  mankind.  Through 
it,  all,  more  or  less,  feel ;  and  if  unequal,  or  if  too  high,  it  becomes  a 
grievance  and  an  oppression  which,  in  more  cases  than  the  tax  on  tea 
before  our  own  Revolution,  and  the  tax  on  salt  before  the  French 
Revolution,  have  helped  to  overwhelm  those  who  imposed  it. 

This  is  not  theorizing,  but  a  great  practical  inquiry,  coming  home 
to  the  business  and  bosoms  of  all.  It  is  a  momentous  question,  then, 
whether,  in  these  embarrassed  times,  and  when  State  taxes  are  unusu- 
ally high,  we  shall  collect  ten  or  thirteen  millions  more  than  is  indis- 
pensably necessary ;  and  it  is  no  less  momentous,  whether  we  shall 
collect  it  so  as  to  burden  heaviest  what  are  necessaries,  rather  than 
luxuries,  and  to  press  most  hardly  labor  and  the  middling  interests, 
rather  than  property  and  the  rich. 

It  is  believed,  sir,  that  the  true  answers  to  these  questions  must 
show  that  this  bill  ought  not  to  pass  ;  and  if  some  little  time  is  occu- 
pied in  attempting  to  prove  it,  the  chairman's  censure  for  any  delay 
in  the  final  disposal  of  it  will  belong  to  himself  and  his  friends,  rather 
than  to  this  side  of  the  Senate.  For  why  has  this  bill,  —  all-import- 
ant as  it  is  considered,  and  as  it  clearly  is,  —  why,  after  a  tedious 
session  of  near  eight  months,  and  after  an  extra  session  before  that 
of  almost  four  months  more,  has  it  never  reached  us  for  discussion 
until  to-day  ?  Among  the  matters  which  the  first  distinguished  chan- 
cellor of  the  exchequer  under  the  new  administration  (Mr.  Clay) 
placed  on  our  journal  (fourteenth  page),  early  in  the  extra  session, 
was  what  " ought  first ,  if  not  exclusively,  to  engage  the  attention 
of  Congress,  —  the  provision  of  an  adequate  revenue  for  the  gov- 
ernment by  the  imposition  of  duties."  Every  day  since,  sir,  you 
have  had  triumphant  majorities  in  both  Houses.  What,  then,  can  be 
the  apology  for  delaying  till  this  late  day  a  provision  which  was 
deemed  so  important,  more  than  a  year  ago,  as  to  be  regarded  a  prom- 
inent reason  for  summoning  then  an  extra  session  of  Congress?  What 
is  the  excuse,  in  the  mean  time,  for  allowing  the  treasury  to  become 
bankrupt?  the  public  laborers  and  contractors  to  go  for  months  unpaid? 
their  families  to  starve,  or  their  claims  to  be  sacrificed,  in  the  money 
market,  to  sharks  and  banks  ?  Instead  of  now  deprecating  discussion, 
why  did  you  not  seasonably  provide  against  all  these  evils,  and  rescue 
our  national  credit  from  degradation,  and  adjourn  as  long  ago  as  last 
May  ?  That  was  the  day  proposed  on  tins  side  of  the  House ;  and  it 
ill  becomes  any  of  those  to  deprecate  the  loss  of  time  now,  in  examin- 
ing a  measure  of  this  magnitude,  who  have  so  strangely  procrastinated 
it ;  and  who,  week  after  week,  —  not  to  say  month  after  month,  — 


268  TARIFF. 

have  wasted  the  session  in  the  consideration  of  veto  resolutions  on 
which  no  vote  has  ever  been  taken,  and  of  resolutions  on  retrench- 
ment equally  left  undecided,  but  almost  every  one  of  which,  thus  far, 
has  been  practically  and  openly  violated.  But,  quitting  any  topic  of 
party  controversy,  I  think  that,  if  we  calmly  examine  the  financial 
condition  of  the  government,  all  this  enormous  twenty-seven,  millions 
of  revenue  will  not  be  found  really  necessary  to  meet  such  expenses 
as  ought  to  be  incurred. 

I  am  aware  that  the  financial  budget  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treas- 
ury, at  the  commencement  of  the  session,  called  for  this  amount,  so 
very  extravagant  for  times  like  these.  But  was  it  the  reduced  amount 
he  and  his  political  friends  had  before  promised  1  Or  was  not  the 
promised  amount,  as  put  forth  imposingly  at  Hanover  court-house,  and 
in  the  Georgia  memorial  at  the  extra  session,  quite  fourteen  millions 
less  1  Indeed,  it  was  not  half  what  is  now  called  for.  The  expenses 
of  Mr.  Adams'  administration  (at  thirteen  millions)  were  held  up 
over  the  whole  country  as  a  model  to  which  you  were  to  conform. 
But  men  of  reflection  knew  full  well  that  such  rash  pledges  were  likely 
to  prove  fallacious,  though  a  reduction  to  seventeen  or  eighteen  mil- 
lions was  considered  feasible  by  the  past  administration,  and  was  in  the 
course  of  gradual  accomplishment  by  the  present  year.  In  this  opinion 
they  were  justified  by  precedents,  as  well  as  your  own  views  that 
an  amount  still  lower  would  be  sufficient.  Looking  to  the  average 
expenses  in  former  periods,  and  making  due  allowances  for  peculiarities 
in  some  of  them,  this  sum  seemed  ample;  as  General  Jackson's  first  term 
was  but  fourteen  millions,  his  second  and  first  united  but  seventeen, 
and  both  of  them  and  his  successors  united  but  twenty-one  millions. 
Though  forced,  at  first,  artificially  higher,  by  the  vast  mass  of  near 
thirty  millions  of  extra  appropriations  accumulated  on  the  last  admin- 
istration under  the  impulses  of  an  overflowing  treasury,  and  the  costly 
protraction  of  the  Florida  war,  equalling  quite  half  of  all  which  was 
expended  in  the  last  contest  with  England,  yet  the  expenses  of  that 
administration,  by  great  efforts  in  reduction,  fell,  in  the  last  two  years, 
to  twenty-five  and  twenty-three  millions.  If  the  policy  thus  adopted 
had  since  been  persevered  in,  the  expenses  last  year  would  have  been 
under  twenty  millions,  and  the  present  year  not  over  eighteen.  But 
what  have  you  done,  and  what  are  you  doing  ?  You  complained  of 
their  highness  when  only  twenty-five  and  twenty-three  millions,  and 
yet  proceeded  at  once  to  raise  them  to  twenty-six. 

We  proposed  reduction  to  eighteen,  and  were  in  rapid  progress  to  it, 
when  you  declared  our  steps  too  slow,  though  retarding  them  by  vot- 
ing, in  almost  every  controverted  case,  for  the  highest  amount.  You 
promised,  if  power  was  conferred  on  you,  to  reduce  them  still  lower  : 
and  yet  you  propose,  by  this  bill,  to  collect,  in  taxes,  to  defray  your 
expenditures  for  this  and  several  years  to  come,  quite  ten  millions 
yearly  more  than  our  limit.  Indeed,  you  wish  to  raise  thirteen  mil- 
lions more  than  would  have  been  necessary  under  our  policy,  retain- 


TARIFF.  269 

ing  the  public  lands,  as  we,  of  course,  contemplated.  You  have  thus 
doubled  the  taxation  that  would  have  been  required  by  us,  and  more 
than  doubled  it  beyond  the  amount  you  yourselves  promised  to  spend. 
What  is  the  justification  of  this  7  The  first  lame  and  impotent  excuse 
offered  is,  that  this  sum  is  all  necessary  to  discharge  the  debts  left  by 
the  past  administration.  What,  sir  !  Want  thirteen  millions  a  year 
more,  for  this  and  several  years  to  come,  to  pay  a  debt  left  by  the  past 
administration  of  only  five  and  a  half  millions  ?  This  is  extraordinary 
arithmetic  !  It  would  answer,  before  the  extra  and  present  session,  to 
talk,  for  political  effect,  of  the  forty  millions  debt  of  the  past  admin- 
istration. But,  since  then,  the  matter  has  been  fully  probed ;  and  we 
have  the  official  report  of  the  present  Secretary,  showing  that  debt  to 
have  been  only  five  and  a  half  millions.  No,  sir.  The  great  debt 
which  now  exists,  except  that  small  sum  which  was  four  years  in  accu- 
mulating, is  all  your  own ;  and  yours,  too,  created  in  little  more  than 
twelve  months.  The  whole  authority  to  borrow,  temporarily  and  per- 
manently, which  you  have  enjoyed  to  the  extent  of  twenty-seven  mil- 
lions, will  probably  be  exercised  at  the  earliest  moment  you  are  able, 
at  any  discount,  in  any  stock-market  in  Europe  or  America,  to  higgle 
away  our  present  broken  and  dishonored  faith.  Indeed,  the  chairman 
admits  that  the  treasury  must  otherwise  stop  payment  again,  as  soon 
as  the  appropriation  bills  now  pending  shall  pass. 

Coming  and  staying  here,  then,  through  the  dog-days  of  the  extra 
session,  in  order,  among  other  things,  as  tauntingly  avowed  on  your 
journal,  "to  contract  a  temporary  loan  to  cover  the  public  debt 
created  by  the  past  administration"  you  at  once  proceeded  so  to 
lavish  appropriations  and  expenditures,  as  well  as  to  squander  your 
heritage  in  the  immense  patrimony  of  the  public  lands,  as  to  have 
required  already,  in  one  brief  year,  authority  to  contract,  on  your  own 
account,  four  times  the  amount  of  our  debts  ;  and  now,  at  the  heel  of 
another  dog-days'  session,  to  require  a  new  tax  bill  of  twenty-seven 
millions  a  year,  to  meet  your  current  engagements. 

It  is  right,  I  admit,  to  equalize  your  expenditures  and  receipts. 
But,  in  periods  of  distress  like  this,  it  can  be  done  rather  more  wisely 
by  husbanding  all  your  old  revenue,  and  reducing  expenses,  than  by 
giving  away  a  part  of  the  old  revenue,  and  increasing  the  expenses  ; 
lighting  the  candle  at  both  ends,  and  then  childishly  wondering  how 
it  burns  so  fast ;  and  complaining  of  the  past  administration  for  that, 
and  almost  everything  else  deplorable. 

If  you  yourselves  throw  away  three  millions  a  year  from  lands,  — 
which  that  administration  and  all  preceding  ones  retained, — you  stare 
at  your  deficiency,  and  complain  of  that  administration  for  it.  If  you 
vote  five  or  six  millions  of  new  appropriations  at  the  extra  session,  and 
contemplate  making  the  vast  amount  (in  peace)  of  twenty-six  more  at 
this  session,  you  are  surprised  at  the  increasing  deficit,  and  complain 
of  us  for  that  also.  If  you  give  away  your  patrimony,  and  incur  mil- 
lions of  loans  at  large  interest,  and  run  in  debt  till  nobody  will  trust 
23* 


270  TARIFF. 

you,  —  while  that  administration  got  quickly  all  it  needed,  and  at  four 
or  five  per  cent.,  — you  wonder  at  your  loss  of  credit,  and  again  com- 
plain of  us  for  it. 

The  real  misfortune,  sir,  is  the  magnificent  scale  on  which  some  of 
your  expenses  are  graduated,  and  the  want  of  foresight  and  practical 
wisdom  in  not  reducing  and  postponing  others,  in  a  depressed  state  of 
business,  common,  at  this  moment,  to  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic. 

Without  entering  here  into  the  folly,  as  well  as  illegality,  of  keeping 
up  a  distribution  of  the  proceeds  of  these  lands,  under  present  circum- 
stances, and  especially  after  the  important  proviso  last  September,  to 
recall  them  whenever  the  duties  were  raised  above  twenty  per  cent., 
let  me  say,  financially,  that  the  question  now  is,  shall  we  recall  them, 
or,  probably,  in  the  end,  be  obliged,  instead  of  them,  to  subject  the 
people  to  a  direct  tax  for  the  whole  three  or  four  millions  which  they 
would  yield,  if  properly  advertised  1  At  all  events,  if  not  taken  back, 
the  duties  will  have  to  be  kept  higher,  quite  to  that  amount,  on  tea, 
coffee,  and  other  necessaries  of  life.  Does  it  not,  then,  behoove  us, 
as  statesmen,  at  once  to  proceed,  and  first  by  a  recall  of  the  lands, 
and  next  by  retrenchment,  to  save  the  country  from  this  useless  addi- 
tional burden  of  ten  or  twelve  millions  of  dollars  ? 

Some  may  think  that  it  is  now  too  late  for  effecting  much  in  the 
way  of  retrenchment.  No,  sir.  The  large  army  and  navy  bills  are 
yet  pending  between  the  two  Houses,  on  amendments.  Though  the 
civil,  diplomatic,  and  Indian  bills  have  passed,  and  on  an  increased 
scale  of  expense,  yet,  if  you  will  only  conform  to  the  reductions  in  the 
others  which  the  House  of  Representatives  recommend,  and  stay  your 
hands  in  other  pending  cases,  much  may  yet  be  accomplished.  That 
your  fortunes,  in  this  respect,  may  yet  in  some  degree  be  retrieved,  is 
manifest  also  from  the  report  of  the  treasury  department  yesterday. 
The  expenses,  the  first  half  of  the  year,  for  ordinary  objects,  have  been 
only  between  nine  and  ten  millions.  At  this  rate  for  the  next  half, 
those  for  the  whole  year  would  be  only  $19,190,052.  I  concede,  sir, 
that  the  naval  and  military  expenses  in  the  last  half  may  be  a  million 
higher ;  but  not  more  than  that,  if  the  appropriations  now  pending  are 
cut  down  as  the  House  proposes,  and  you  refrain  from  making  many 
more.  At  the  same  time,  our  civil  and  diplomatic  will  be  a  million 
less,  unless  our  sessions  are  to  be  eternal,  and  we  are  to  add  still  more 
to  the  judiciary,  foreign,  and  other  expenses  provided  for  in  the  gen- 
eral appropriation  bill. 

Allow  me,  then,  to  warn  the  Senate  that,  even  now,  there  is  oppor- 
tunity to  relieve  the  country  much,  if  we  boldly  march  up  to  the  task 
of  promised  retrenchment,  and  also  recall  the  lands.  The  last  alone 
would  enable  you  to  reduce  this  tax  bill  one  ninth.  Respect  the  other 
House  as  to  their  reductions  in  the  navy  and  military  bills  by  large 
majorities,  as  we  are  urged  by  the  chairman  to  respect  their  conduct 
in  passing  this  bill,  though  done  only  by  a  majority  of  four.  Persist 
in  the  policy  of  deferring  harbor  and  river  bills,  in  these  embarrassed 


TARIFF.  271 

times,  as  we  did,  but  which  you  then  censured,  though  now  you  imi- 
tate ;  persist,  too,  in  omitting  to  construct  any  jobbing  or  speculating 
light-houses  ;  persist  in  keeping  back  large  appropriations  for  forts,  till 
what  has  been  already  voted  is  expended ;  razee  even  now, —  it  is  not 
too  late, —  razee,  as  your  great  leader  recommended  early  in  the  ses- 
sion, many  of  your  foreign  ministers;  call  on  your  retrenchment 
committee  —  that  boasted,  yet,  I  regret  to  say,  dumb  committee  —  to 
reduce  and  postpone  elsewhere,  without  delay :  —  do  thus,  and  I  will 
guarantee  that  the  receipts  from  customs  in  the  present  year,  without 
the  passage  of  this  bill  at  all,  will  pay  the  whole  current  expenses,  if 
you  only  raise  the  free  articles  to  twenty  per  cent.,  and  take  back 
and  advertise  suitably  the  public  lands. 

The  actual  receipts  from  customs  and  lands  in  the  first  half  of  this 
year,  depressed  as  trade  is,  corroborate  this  position.  They  will  be, 
when  all  are  ascertained,  near -eighteen  millions  and  a  quarter  for  the 
whole  year.  But,  in  the  last  hahy  all  the  duties  accruing  will  be  paid 
in  cash,  beside  those  in  the  first  half  placed  on  credit,  and  running 
into  the  last  half  for  payment.  This  would  make  three  millions  more, 
if  the  rate  was  as  high  ;  but,  being  lower,  add  only  one  million  on  that 
amount.  Half  a  million  more  for  increase  sales'  of  lands,  if  advertised, 
and  a  million  more  duties  imposed  the  rest  of  the  year  on  goods  now 
free,  and  these  will  constitute  an  aggregate  of  $20,766,668.  This  is 
enough  to  pay  the  nineteen  millions  of  ordinary  expenses,  and  interest 
on  all  the  loans  contracted  to  redeem  treasury  notes,  or  any  other 
purposes. 

It  must,  then,  be  manifest,  without  going  into  further  details,  that, 
with  promptitude  and  energy,  it  is  not  too  late  to  relieve  the  people 
in  this  mariner  from  at  least  ten  to  twelve  millions  of  the  taxes  pro- 
posed in  the  bill  now  before  the  Senate.  If  we  are  sincere  in  desiring 
to  lessen  the  burdens  under  which  the  productive  industry  of  the 
country  staggers,  if  we  wish  to  alleviate  the  general  distress,  can  we 
be  justified  in  an  attempt  to  impose  so  much  more  than  is  indispens- 
able? 

In  all  other  countries,  when  severe  embarrassments  prevail,  do  not 
their  governments  seek  to  lessen,  rather  than  increase,  the  weight  of 
taxation  1  By  such  a  course  of  policy  here  at  this  crisis,  not  only 
would  burdens  be  lightened,  but  a  greater  interchange  of  commodities 
would  relieve  agriculture,  and  invigorate  commercial  confidence. 

Having  reviewed  your  lavish  ways  to  get  rid  of  the  public  income, 
I  will  now  advert  to  your  means  for  providing  it.  For  this  is  a  ques- 
tion of  both  ways  and  means.  If  the  Senate  do  not  consider  the 
amount  of  expenditures  objectionable,  it  is  your  duty  undoubtedly  to 
raise  that  amount  in  some  proper  mode.  I  am  in  favor  of  the  firm 
support  of  the  public  service  in  all  its  branches.  I  am  for  all  neces- 
sary taxation,  however  hard  it  may  press  upon  individuals,  if  the 
pressure  is  equally  distributed.  The  glory  of  our  laws  —  those  impos- 
ing taxes,  as  well  as  all  others  —  consists  in  their  equal  and  impartial 


272  TARIFF. 

justice.  I  countenance  no  repudiation,  no  evasion  of  obligations, 
whether  public  or  private.  Let  those  in  power  do  their  duty  fear- 
lessly. I  am  anxious  to  see  them  redeem  the  public  faith,  and  resus- 
citate our  drowning,  if  not  drowned,  credit. 

The  country  will  not  tolerate  an  adjournment  of  Congress  without 
something  efficient  being  accomplished  for  this  purpose.  It  is  para- 
mount to  all  mere  party  considerations,  and  must  not  be  blinked, 
dodged,  patched  up,  or  in  any  way  shunned.  But  let  this  be  done 
without  partiality  to  favored  pursuits,  and  without  sectional  prefer- 
ences. Does  this  bill  propose  the  best  mode  of  accomplishing  that 
desirable  end  1 

The  true  rate  of  duty  to  be  imposed  on  imports  of  foreign  merchan- 
dise, looking  to  all  the  questions  of  political  economy  and  public  justice 
connected  with  that  form  of  taxation,  is  a  question  difficult  to  settle. 
The  rate  is  sometimes  made  to  depend  on  the  character  of  the  article, 
whether  a  luxury  or  necessary  of  life ;  sometimes  on  the  conduct  of 
the  nation  from  which  it  comes,  in  respect  to  the  retaliation  provoked 
by  her  taxation  upon  our  products ;  sometimes  on  the  burdens,  large 
or  small,  already  laid  by  ourselves  on  other  property ;  and  again,  on 
the  growth  and  manufacture  of  similar  articles  at  home,  on  the  press- 
ing wants  of  the  government,  or  on  the  unpopularity  of  collecting 
taxes  from  other  sources.  Nor  has  the  practice  of  different  countries, 
or  of  the  same  at  different  periods,  been  very  uniform,  concerning  this 
rate,  for  all  these  purposes  combined.  But  when  the  object  of  the 
duty  is  merely  for  revenue,  as  is  here  avowed,  and  as  the  title  of  the 
bill  indicates,  being  "to  provide  revenue  from  imports,"  the  result  of 
general  experience  and  of  careful  reasoning  is,  that  the  duty  for  that 
purpose  alone  ought  seldom  to  exceed  twenty  per  cent.  I  admit  that 
it  has  often  been  higher  for  some  of  the  other  purposes  before  named ; 
but,  as  a  general  rule,  when  revenue  alone  is  the  object,  the  better 
opinion  in  most  countries  certainly  is,  that  twenty  per  cent.,  or  there- 
abouts, is  the  best  maximum.  If  it  varies  a  little,  and  goes  below  to 
fifteen,  or  above  to  twenty-five,  it  may  at  times  make  no  essential 
difference. 

But  this  bill,  while  professing  to  be  formed  for  purposes  of  pure  fis- 
cal taxation,  not  only  goes  above  twenty  or  twenty-five  in  numerous 
instances,  but,  in  several,  above  one  hundred.  Indeed,  its  whole 
duties  are,  on  an  average,  near  thirty-six  per  cent,  and  some  calculate 
them  at  quite  thirty-nine.  It  therefore  becomes  important  to  ascer- 
tain whether  this  large  excess  of  sixteen  or  nineteen  per  cent,  on  an 
average,  for  revenue  alone,  is  not  improper  on  general  principles,  as 
well  as  inadmissible  under  some  leading  circumstances  connected  with 
the  peculiar  position  of  the  General  Government,  as  to  taxation  and 
the  compromise.  If  I  shall  be  successful  in  showing  this,  the  bill 
should  undergo  a  material  change  in  its  whole  structure,  and  a  reduc- 
tion be  made  in  its  rates  of  duties  to  the  proper  standard.  But,  if  not 
successful,  or  if  these  rates  are  found  to  be  imposed  so  high  for  pro- 


TARIFF.  273 

tection,  and  not  revenue,  it  will  become  necessary  to  inquire  whether 
the  right  exists  in  this  government  to  raise  duties  high  for  protection 
alone;  and  if  it  does,  whether  they  are  here  assessed  in  such  an 
amount,  and  in  such  a  manner,  in  respect  to  all  the  great  interests  of 
society  entitled  to  equal  protection,  as  alone  can  justify  the  passage 
of  the  bill,  as  a  measure  of  equal  protection,  of  equal  legislation,  and 
of  equal  taxation,  on  the  whole  people. 

One  of  the  strongest  proofs  that  a  duty  equivalent  to  about  twenty 
per  cent,  is  high  enough  for  the  purpose  of  revenue,  is  the  practice  of 
most  nations  in  not  exceeding  such  a  rate  for  that  purpose.  Thus,  the 
tax  on  imported  corn,  at  Athens,  was  limited  to  one-fifth,  or  exactly 
twenty  per  cent. ;  and  the  early  tariffs  in  England,  for  revenue,  sel- 
dom, if  ever,  exceeded  twenty,  and  were  often  but  five  per  cent. 
When  they  began  to  exceed  it  (as  they  have  done,  in  more  modern 
times,  for  the  purposes  of  retaliation  or  protection,  though  before  1787 
no  higher  than  twenty-seven  per  cent.,  even  for  those  purposes),  they 
have  proved  to  be  so  disadvantageous  for  revenue,  as  to  lead  often  to  a 
much  lower  duty,  when  imposed  for  revenue  alone,  as  is  the  case  on 
colonial  products.  Indeed,  the  conviction  has  become  so  strong  there, 
with  all  parties,  that  for  revenue  alone  twenty  per  cent,  is  sufficiently 
high,  that  the  plan  proposed  by  the  present  ministry  is,  to  impose  on 
all  materials  for  manufactures  a  duty  not  over  five  per  cent.,  and,  in 
many  instances,  lower,  or  free;  next,  on  articles  partly  manufac- 
tured, not  over  twelve  per  cent. ;  and  on  manufactures  themselves,  not 
over  twenty  per  cent.  In  cases  of  imports  from  their  colonies,  there 
is  to  be  a  differential  duty,  often  more  moderate  than  this. 

Lord  John  Russell  (the  organ  of  the  preceding  ministry)  enter- 
tained similar  views ;  and  the  most  enlightened  there  seem  now  to  con- 
cur with  the  committee  on  imports,  that  "it  is  obvious  that  high  pro- 
tective duties  check  importation,  and,  consequently,  are  unproductive 
to  the  revenue ;  and  experience  shows  that  the  profit  to  the  trader,  the 
benefit  to  the  consumer,  and  the  fiscal  interests  of  the  country,  are  all 
sacrificed,  when  heavy  import  duties  impede  the  interchange  of  com- 
modities with  other  nations." 

As  an  indication  of  the  present  feeling  on  this  subject,  allow  me  to 
read  a  sentence,  which  came  by  the  very  last  packet : 

"  The  intelligence  from  the  continent  is  of  little  interest,  if  we  except  the  publica- 
tion of  a  royal  ordinance  in  France,  imposing  an  ad  valorem  duty  of  twenty  per  cent, 
on  all  linen  yarn  imported  into  the  kingdom.  As  may  be  expected,  such  a  revolu- 
tionary measure  has  produced  great  stir  with  English  manufacturers  ;  but  it  is 
expected  the  French  government  will  submit  to  an  amelioration." 

In  truth,  the  average  duties  in  France  do  not,  for  some  time,  appear 
to  have  exceeded  seventeen  or  eighteen  per  cent,  for  revenue ;  which 
is  one  ground  of  the  surprise  at  twenty  per  cent,  on  linen  yarn,  and 
is  another  decisive  evidence  that  such  a  rate  is  now  regarded  there,  as 
well  as  in  England,  sufficiently  high  for  all  fiscal  purposes.     In  sev- 


274  TARIFF. 

eral  of  the  other  countries  of  Europe,  where  duties  are  higher,  it  is 
avowedly  for  retaliation  or  protection.  It  was  long  the  boast  and 
glory  of  Holland  and  Switzerland  that  their  duties  were  only  twelve 
and  fifteen  per  cent. ;  and,  probably,  for  revenue,  scarce  an  instance 
now  exists  in  the  latter  country  of  their  being  as  high  as  twenty  per 
cent. 

In  Cuba, — that  most  prosperous  island  in  both  commerce  and  agri- 
culture, and  whose  exports  and  imports  per  head  of  her  population  are 
near  four  times  the  amount  of  ours,  and  three  times  the  amount  in 
England, — the  duties  are  often  less  than  twenty,  and  seldom  exceed 
twenty-five  per  cent. 

But  in  our  own  records  we  have  illustration,  equally  convincing, 
that  such  a  standard  is  high  enough  for  all  fiscal  purposes.  During 
the  Revolution,  and  till  the  new  constitution  was  adopted,  Hamilton 
says  (in  No.  35  of  the  Federalist)  that  three  per  cent,  was  the  high- 
est rate.  He  did  not  propose,  under  the  new  government,  to  go 
beyond  nine,  in  ordinary  cases.  He  thought  spirits,  as  a  luxury, 
might  bear  a  tax  of  one  shilling  per  gallon,  which  was  about  twelve 
per  cent. ;  and  if  it  diminished  the  revenue,  because  so  high,  as  was 
apprehended,  the  gain  to  the  public  morals,  by  discouraging  the  use 
of  so  bad  a  luxury,  might  prove  an  equivalent. 

Accordingly,  when  the  constitution  went  into  operation,  the  first 
tariff  did  not  rise  above  twelve  and  a  half  per  cent.,  except  in  a  single 
instance  approaching  nearly  fifteen.  It  is  difficult,  after  this  lapse  of 
time,  in  cases  in  which  the  duties  were  specific,  to  reduce  them,  with 
exactness,  to  a  true  ad  valorem  standard.  But  no  comparisons  can  be 
made  which  are  of  any  utility,  either  in  our  own  country  at  different 
periods,  or  between  our  own  and  foreign  nations,  without  being  at  the 
labor  to  do  this  in  the  most  important  articles. 

I  have,  therefore,  attempted  it  myself,  in  such  cases,  generally, 
though  adopting  a  few  from  one  of  the  Committee  on  Manufactures,  in 
the  other  House ;  and  having  made  the  official  values  on  which  the 
duties  were  actually  assessed  the  basis  of  my  computations,  rather 
than  newspaper  price-currents,  or  merchants'  books,  it  will  not  be  a 
matter  of  surprise  if  some  difference  should  exist.  But  mine,  beside 
being  in  this  way  most  conformable  to  law,  will,  in  any  event,  answer 
for  the  general  purpose  of  comparative  examination. 

The  first  tariff  of  1789,  even  if  made  higher,  in  some  respects,  for 
protection  (as  some  have  contended,  but  which  is  very  questionable), 
placed  most  of  its  duties  as  low  as  five  and  ten  per  cent.  As  it  was 
altered,  from  time  to  time,  till  the  war  of  1812,  scarce  an  instance  can 
be  found  where  it  ranged  above  twenty.  It  remained,  in  most  partic- 
ulars, as  low  as  ten  and  fifteen  per  cent. ;  and  where,  as  in  the  case  of 
spirits  and  salt,  it  had  gone  higher,  the  whole  duty  on  the  last  became 
repealed  in  1807,  and  on  the  former  the  object  was  rather  to  dis- 
countenance a  baneful  luxury  than  collect  greater  revenue. 

Here  is  a  table  for  comparison  of  the  whole  of  those  tariffs.     Passing 


TARIFF.  275 

by  the  doubling  of  the  duties  during  the  war,  it  is  true  that  the  next 
tariffs  of  1816,  1824,  and  1828,  exceeded,  in  many  cases,  the  rate  of 
twenty  per  cent. ;  but  all  of  these  did  it  avowedly  for  protection  rather 
than  revenue.  The  chairman  not  only  admits  this  as  to  the  two  last, 
but  argues  strongly  to  prove  it.  In  the  ardent  pursuit  of  that  protec- 
tion (urged  on  Congress  almost  exclusively  by  and  for  one  class  of 
the  community),  the  oppression  became  so  great  to  some  other  classes 
and  sections,  and  the  benefits  of  such  high  duties  became  so  questiona- 
ble, even  for  protection,  that,  in  1833,  the  whole  system  was  aban- 
doned, and  the  duties  gradually  reduced,  so  as  by  law,  where  not  free, 
to  range,  by  the  present  year,  no  higher  than  the  very  revenue  stand- 
ard, for  which  I  am  now  contending. 

This  circumstance  furnishes  another  striking  argument  in  support 
of  a  limitation  to  that  rate.  It  was  agreed  on  deliberately  by  the 
highest  representatives  of  all  our  great  interests.  It  was  moulded  into 
a  form  to  remain,  in  that  particular,  perpetual,  unless  in  some  great 
exigency. 

It  was  to  operate  gradually,  so  as  not,  by  sudden  changes,  to 
derange  capital  or  revenue.  It  was  a  great  pacificator  of  sectional  and 
fraternal  troubles ;  and  it  has  ever  since  been  called  and  eulogized  as  a 
sacred  compromise  of  former  difficulties.  Mr.  Clay  pledged  himself 
originally  to  abide  by  it,  not  only  while  above  twenty  per  cent., — as 
then  most  beneficial  to  his  friends,-^  but  after  it  had  reached  twenty, 
and  had  begun  to  benefit  most  oi  his  opponents.  This  pledge  he 
renewed  at  Hanover  court-house,  as  late  as  1840;  and  General 
Harrison,  also,  in  his  Zanesville  letter,  deliberately  avowed,  as  to  the 
compromise,  that  he  never  would  agree  "  to  its  being  altered  or 
repealed"  The  compromise,  then,  consecrates  this  rate  as  a  general 
guide.  But  what  do  we  hear  now?  That  we  were  obliged  to  go 
down,  in  conformity  to  the  compromise,  but  not  to  stay  down,  in 
conformity  to  it. 

If  there  was  any  glory — and  much  is  claimed — for  making  that 
critical  adjustment,  can  there  be  any  in  breaking  it  ?  If  there  was 
any  propriety  in  reducing  the  rate  to  twenty  per  cent.,  is  there  not  as 
much  in  keeping  it  there  1  If  there  was  any  sound  principle  in  the 
arrangement,  as  well  as  in  the  contest,  can  it  be  satisfied  with  the 
child's  play  of  running  gradually  down  the  scale  to  twenty  per  cent., 
and  then  running  up  again,  at  a  single  leap,  to  fifty,  sixty,  and  one 
hundred  per  cent.?  Whether,  in  a  great  exigency,  it  might  be  proper 
to  go  above  twenty  per  cent.,  for  purposes  of  revenue  alone,  can  be 
settled  when  that  exigency  arrives ;  and  when  it  is  made  to  appear  that 
more  can  probably  be  collected  by  a  higher  rate,  and  that  none  of  it  is 
asked  for  protection,  or  in  consequence  of  having  given  the  lands  away, 
or  unnecessarily  swollen  our  expenses.  But,  to  attempt  it  under  any 
other  circumstances,  is,  in  my  opinion,  most  unjustifiable. 

Again:  by  going  above  twenty  per  cent.,  in  the  manner  now  pro- 
posed, you  violate  another  compromise,  made  in  the  distribution  act, 


276  TARIFF. 

last  September.  It  was  there  solemnly  stipulated,  that  if  any  exi- 
gency should  arise  to  require  a  higher  rate  of  duty  than  twenty  per 
cent.,  the  proceeds  of  the  lands  should  return  to  the  treasury,  and  thus 
help  to  reduce  the  tariff  again  nearer  the  former  standard.  One  pro- 
vision in  this  bill  goes  directly  to  the  violation  of  that  stipulation ;  and 
thus,  in  that  particular,  it  seems  to  stand  out  to  the  world,  in  bold 
relief,  as  utterly  faithless.  It  is  at  war  with  the  professed  object  of 
the  bill,  which  is  to  raise  and  not  give  away  revenue ;  and  being,  vir- 
tually, a  new  distribution,  in  new  terms,  and  under  new  circumstances, 
ought  not  to  remain  in,  and  thus  endanger  its  success,  but  be  legis- 
lated on  separately,  if  at  all. 

Another  vital  consideration  for  adhering  to  a  rate  of  duty  on 
imports  not  much  above  twenty  per  cent,  is,  that  if  you  go  higher, 
whether  horizontally  or  by  discrimination,  an  instant  temptation  is 
held  out,  as  now,  to  give  away  other  revenue  (like  the  lands),  and 
resist  retrenchment  in  expenses,  as  well  as  make  large  additions  to 
them,  in  order  to  create  an  occasion  to  raise  the  tariff  higher,  and  thus 
to  obtain,  directly  or  indirectly,  more  protection.  It  is  therefore 
essential,  with  a  view  to  secure  economy  in  husbanding  means,  as  well 
as  in  reducing  expenses,  that  so  powerful  a  motive  to  the  contrary  as 
this  should  not  for  a  moment  longer  be  allowed  to  exist. 

It  will  be  seen  that,  in  this  view,  a  low  tariff  tends  to  produce  econ- 
omy ;  a  high  one,  extravagance.  A  low  one  is,  likewise,  democratic ; 
a  high  one,  anti-democratic.  And  the  very  highest  which  has  ever 
occurred  before  in  this  country  was  imposed  in  1828,  under  an  admin- 
istration the  most  anti-democratic  which  has  before  existed  here  since 
1798. 

The  bill,  by  going  for-  such  high  rates,  is  wrong  in  another  view ; 
and  that  one  which  has  great  influence  in  all  countries,  in  limiting  the 
tax  on  imports  for  mere  revenue  to  something  not  much  above  twenty 
per  cent.  It  is,  that  a  tax  of  this  rate,  on  this  kind  of  personal  prop- 
erty, is  quite  the  fair  proportion  to  be  paid  on  it  towards  the  public 
burdens,  compared  with  the  taxes  on  other  property.  Thus,  though 
direct  taxes  might  show  to  the  people  more  distinctly  the  extent  of 
their  expenses,  and  the  burdens  thereby  devolved  on  them,  yet,  in  the 
present  relations  between  the  States  and  the  General  Government,  I 
am  not  the  advocate  of  direct  taxes.  The  education,  habits,  and 
prejudices  of  our  people,  are  more  favorable  to  a  tariff  on  foreign 
imports,  to  support  the  General  Government,  whenever  enough  can 
fairly  be  raised  from  that  source.  The  propriety  of  such  a  course  is 
strengthened  by  the  fact  that  most  of  the  State  taxes  are  direct ;  and 
that  the  burdens  of  the  General  Government  should,  therefore,  as  far 
as  practicable,  without  inequality  and  injustice,  be  flung  upon  different 
sources  of  revenue, —  such  as  a  tariff.  Hence,  in  that  sense,  and  to 
that  extent,  I  am  "  a  tariff  man"  I  am  in  favor  of  such  a  tariff  as 
was  agreed  on  in  the  compromise  act,  and  such  a  tariff  as  prevailed 
from  the  adoption  of  the  constitution  till  the  last  war  with  England. 


TAK1FF.  277 

But  collecting  by  such  a  tariff  all  which  duties  of  twenty  per  cent, 
will  yield,  and  husbanding  the  proceeds  of  the  public  lands,  if  more 
revenue  should  be  still  needed  to  meet  an  economical  administration 
of  the  government  (which  I  do  not  believe  is  the  case  now),  I  contend 
that  impartiality  and  equal  justice  among  the  different  classes  of  peo- 
ple and  kinds  of  property  in  society  require  that  the  balance  should 
be  obtained  from  some  other  source. 

To  illustrate  this  by  figures  :  Suppose  a  tax  of  twenty  per  cent,  was 
laid  on  all  property  in  this  country  equally.  If  valuing  that  property, 
as  many  do,  at  $4,000,000,000,  it  would  amount  to  an  aggregate  tax 
of  $800,000,000.  But  the  whole  aggregate  of  taxes  now  collected 
in  money  in  the  United  States,  including  twenty  per  cent,  on  imports, 
does  not  probably  exceed  $60,000,000.  This,  it  will  be  seen,  is  not 
one-tenth  what  it  would  be,  if  all  other  property  were  taxed  as  high 
as  twenty  per  cent,  on  imports.  Yet,  in  the  face  of  this,  you  propose 
to  lay  still  more  on  imports,  by  nearly  double.  Another  evidence  of 
this  great  disproportion  is,  that  the  tax  on  imports  would  not  be  two 
per  cent.,  if  it  was  in  the  ratio  of  the  value  of  our  imports  to  the  value 
of  all  other  property. 

I  am  aware  that  much  of  the  property  in  society  should  be  taxed 
according  to  its  income,  rather  than  its  value ;  but,  taking  that  guide, 
the  inequality  with  which  imports  are  treated  would  still  be  very 
striking. 

Again:  it  was  computed  by  Hamilton,  in  1787,  that  the  tax  on 
imports  should  equal  not  more  than  one-third  of  all  other  taxation  in 
the  United  States.  As  the  General  Government  might,  therefore,  in 
case  of  war,  or  other  calamities,  require  more  revenue  than  one-third, 
and  more  than  a  just  tax  on  imports  would  yield,  he  argued  strenu- 
ously that  it  should  also  have  authority  to  tax  land,  and  impose 
excises  of  any  kind,  in  order  to  procure  the  residue.  Yet  you,  by 
this  bill,  propose  to  collect,  from  imports  alone,  half  the  whole  mon- 
ied  taxes  of  the  country.  The  gross  amount  is  to  be  near  two  dol- 
lars per  head,  on  an  average,  when  less  than  that  amount  is  paid  in 
most  of  the  States  in  money  on  all  other  property,  and  including,  in 
some,  a  tax  on  polls  beside. 

Experience,  here  and  elsewhere,  has  evinced  strongly  the  correct- 
ness of  these  views.  During  the  Revolution,  among  the  highest  rates 
of  duty  on  imports  was  three  per  cent. ;  and  the  rest  of  the  taxes 
were  imposed  on  other  property.  So,  in  the  first  ten  years  of  the 
present  government,  with  interest  on  a  large  debt,  beside  current 
expenses  to  be  paid,  not  over  twenty  per  cent.,  on  an  average,  was 
imposed  on  imports,  and  the  rest  collected  in  various  ways  from  other 
property.  So,  during  the  late  war,  a  large  portion  of  the  revenue  was 
derived  from  other  taxes  than  those  on  imports. 

France  attempts  to  raise  only  about  one-seventh  of  her  revenue  from 
customs.  England  finds  a  deficiency,  after  all  her  attempts  to  collect 
the  large  proportion  of  about  half  her  revenue  from  imports :  and  Sir 
24 


278  TARIFF. 

Robert  Peel  at  last  admits  that  the  further  amount  ought  to  be  pro- 
cured, in  justice  and  equality,  from  other  sources.  He  says,  in  short, 
"that  the  burden  should  fall  on  the  property  of  the  country, —  not 
upon  those  who  are  chiefly  occupied  in  its  productive  industry."  This 
discloses  another  reason,  and  a  potent  one,  why  a  higher  rate  of  taxa- 
tion on  imports  than  twenty  per  cent,  is  unjust.  It  falls  almost  exclu- 
sively on  "  those  who  are  chiefly  occupied  in  the  productive  indus- 
try of  the  country."  It  is  as  heavy  a  burden,  to  the  laborer  and 
farmer,  in  many  cases,  as  to  the  large  capitalist ;  as  the  former  con- 
sume nearly  an  equal  quantity  with  the  last  of  many  articles  most 
highly  taxed, —  such  as  salt,  sugar,  molasses,  cottons,  woollens  and 
iron.  It  thus  operates  with  all  the  inequality  and  injustice  of  a  large 
poll-tax,  and  is,  on  that  account,  equally  objectionable. 

But  another  strong  admonition  against  raising  duties  much  above 
twenty  per  cent,  is,  that,  in  doing  so,  you  are  by  no  means  sure  of 
obtaining  much  more  revenue. 

I  admit,  readily,  that  you  may  thus  obtain  more  protection,  and 
more  retaliation,  if  seeking  either  of  these ;  but  if  seeking  only  more 
revenue  (as  is  here  pretended),  your  success  will  be  at  least  questiona- 
ble. At  the  same  time,  it  is  certain  that,  by  going  very  high,  you 
will  deprive  the  people,  by  higher  prices,  of  the  ability  to  enjoy  some 
comforts  and  necessaries  which  a  more  moderate  tariff  would  not  pre- 
vent ;  or  will  demoralize  many  of  them,  by  thus  holding  out  additional 
temptations  to  violate  the  laws  by  smuggling. 

The  first  reason  why  you  are  not  likely  to  obtain  a  much  larger 
aggregate  of  revenue  under  duties  much  above  this  rate  is,  that  when 
so  high,  the  amount  is  of  sufficient  importance,  in  most  cases,  to  raise 
the  price  of  the  article.  Hence,  the  consumer  having  only  the  same 
means  as  before,  cannot  purchase  so  much  of  it,  and  less  is  imported. 

The  next  reason  is,  that,  when  the  duty  is  high,  and  sometimes 
before  it  reaches  twenty  per  cent.,  the  temptation  (and,  indeed,  bounty) 
for  smuggling  is  so  great,  that,  on  this  account,  less  of  what  is  imported 
pays  any  duty,  and  the  revenue  is  thereby  lessened.  That  high  duties, 
as  a  general  rule,  increase  the  price  of  the  article,  and  fall  chiefly  on 
the  consumer,  and  thus  diminish  both  consumption  and  revenue,  is  the 
general  doctrine,  not  only  of  McCulloch  and  other  writers  abroad,  but 
of  the  parliamentary  committee  on  imports,  as  well  as  most  expe- 
rienced and  scientific  writers.  Speaking  of  high  and  protective 
duties,  they  say:  "  These  impose  on  the  consumer  a  tax  equal  to  the 
amount  of  the  duties  levied  on  the  foreign  article,"  and  "  check  import- 
ation, and,  consequently,  are  unproductive  to  the  revenue."  Hamilton 
maintained  a  similar  notion.  But  I  concede  that,  when  the  duty  is 
prohibitory  (which,  in  many  articles,  is  the  case  at  little  more  than 
twenty  per  cent.),  the  price,  at  times,  is  regulated  by  the  competition 
at  home  among  the  manufacturers  of  similar  goods  ;  and,  also,  that  in 
a  great  glut  and  depression  of  the  market,  the  holders  of  goods  are 
occasionally  obliged  to  sell  under  first  cost.     But  these  are  merely 


TARIFF.  279 

exceptions  to  general  principles,  as  is  a  fall  of  prices,  which  sometimes 
takes  place  after  a  duty  is  imposed,  as  well  as  in  the  case  of  a  free  arti- 
cle. This  often  happens  from  some  improvement  in  the  manufacture, 
or  some  new  invention  of  labor-saving  machinery.  But  it  is  ridiculous 
to  pretend  that,  in  such  cases,  the  fall  is  in  consequence  of  the  duty: 
and,  as  one  has  gravely  calculated  in  the  other  House,  sometimes  equals 
u  fifty  ■>  or  a  hundred,  or  even  four  hundred  per  cent."  These  last 
must  be  rather  of  a  paradoxical  character.  Causes  enough  for  all  the 
reductions  in  price  which  occur  in  most  of  our  imports  will  be  found, 
independent  of  any  mystery  about  the  duties,  when  we  call  to  mind  the 
remarkable  fact,  that  the  changeable  declared  real  value  of  British 
exports  has,  since  1819,  in  consequence  of  useful  improvements  and 
inventions,  as  well  as  a  sounder  currency  and  more  general  peace,  grad- 
ually fallen  from  an  equality  with  the  permanent  official  value,  till  it  is 
now  only  one-half  of  that.  Again :  if  the  manufacturers  did  not  believe 
that  the  article  rose  in  price  as  taxed  higher,  why  do  they  wish  it  to  be 
so  taxed?  So  doing  cannot  aid  them,  unless  it  raises  the  price.  If, 
on  the  contrary,  the  actual  operation  of  a  high  duty  be  to  lower  prices, 
why  do  not  the  manufacturers  desire  the  duty  to  be  lessened  on  rival 
fabrics  from  abroad, —  as  that,  on  their  reasoning,  would  increase  their 
prices'? 

Why  is  it,  also,  that  the  duty  on  raw  materials  imported  from 
abroad  is  not  asked  to  be  raised,  instead  of  removed  ;  and  the  duty  to 
be  increased,  rather  than  refunded,  on  railroad  iron,  if  it  makes  the 
price  lower?  So  through  the  whole  system  of  drawbacks,  and  like- 
wise of  smaller  differential  duties  in  favor  of  colonies.  This  point, 
then,  being  established,  that  an  increase  of  duty  generally  increases 
the  price  of  the  article,  it  seems  to  follow  inevitably,  that  so  much  of 
it  cannot  be  imported  and  consumed,  and  as  much  revenue  received  on 
it,  as  if  the  duty  were  less.  Yet  a  naivete,  and  almost  simplicity, 
seems  to  have  been  exhibited  by  all  the  financiers  on  the  other  side, 
from  the  Secretary  downwards,  in  calculating  that  the  same  amount 
of  imports  is  likely  to  take  place,  and  be  entered  at  the  custom-house, 
when  the  duty  on  them  is,  in  various  instances,  from  fifty  to  one  hun- 
dred and  twenty  per  cent.,  and  in  all  at  least  thirty-six  per  cent,  on  an 
average,  as  if  no  duty  exceeded  twenty.  In  England  they  have  just 
experienced  a  new  illustration  of  what  is  often  to  be  expected  on  this 
subject.  An  addition  of  five  per  cent,  was  made  on  certain  customs 
and  the  excise,  but  which,  in  fact  yielded  only  half  of  one  per  cent, 
additional  revenue,  instead  of  five,  as  anticipated.  More  may,  at 
times,  be  obtained  by  duties  above  twenty  per  cent.,  where  the  present 
duty  is  very  low,  and  the  article  taxed  highly  is  a  great  necessary,  and 
no  substitute  can  be  procured,  and  ample  means  exist  to  pay  for  it; 
but,  otherwise,  the  attempt  is  either  a  financial  lottery,  or  a  mere 
bubble. 

Many  gentlemen  seem,  likewise,  to  have  overlooked  the  probability 
that  an  increased  duty  will,  in  such  distressed  times  as  these,  operate 


280  TARIFF. 

more  unfavorably  than  usual  against  large  imports.  The  pecuniary 
embarrassments  of  the  country,  under  a  contracted  currency,  and 
revulsions  arising  from  that  and  immense  speculations,  are  unprece- 
dented. The  State  taxes,  in  many  cases,  are  also  higher  than  usual ; 
its  credit  abroad,  to  procure  goods,  never  worse ;  its  new  bankrupt  law 
so  sweeping  and  ruinous  in  character  as  to  weaken  much  ordinary 
confidence  in  business,  and  the  prices  of  its  great  staple  exports,  which 
furnish  the  means  of  purchasing,  are  low,  from  the  absence  of  wars, 
and  the  abundance  of  productive  laborers  in  Europe,  as  well  as 
America.  No  new  State  or  corporate  loans  are  to  come  home  in 
goods ;  and  the  duties  are  hereafter  to  be  paid  in  advance,  in  cash.  In 
such  a  condition  of  things,  it  would  be  rather  sanguine  to  expect  as 
large  imports,  even  on  low  duties.  But,  if  an  addition  is  made  of  near 
twenty  per  cent,  more,  the  consumer  must,  on  that  account  alone,  dis- 
pense with  every  sixth  bushel  of  salt,  or  sixth  pound  of  sugar  or  tea, 
he  now  consumes.  The  entire  duty  is  thus  lost  on  the  sixth  bushel  or 
pound  not  imported  and  not  consumed ;  and,  if  no  evasions  of  the  law 
exist,  the  government  has  got  no  more  gross  revenue,  and  has  lost  all 
the  extra  expense  of  collecting  and  guarding  the  customs,  when  high. 
But  wherever  a  bushel  or  pound  of  any  article  is  smuggled  under  the 
high  duty,  which  would  not  have  been  under  a  lower  duty,  the  gross 
as  well  as  the  net  revenue  is  to  that  extent  lessened,  beside  all  the 
immorality  thus  introduced.  All  extremes  naturally  react,  and  defeat 
the  object  intended ;  and  in  nothing  is  this  more  conspicuous  than  in 
high  taxation  on  imports. 

It  seems,  also,  to  have  been  forgotten  that,  as  our  manufactures 
have  become  improved,  a  duty  less  high  is  more  prohibitory  and  inju- 
rious to  the  revenue ;  and  that  many  articles  are  now  made  here,  all 
of  which  were  formerly  imported.  It  is  true  that  we  have  obtained 
an  immense  sum  from  customs  since  1789  —  nearly  $732,000,000, 
according  to  the  chairman's  calculation ;  and  he  would  seem  to  infer 
from  this,  that  we  can  hereafter  obtain  from  that  source,  with  ease, 
twenty-seven  or  twenty-eight  millions  of  dollars  a  year.  But  did  it 
never  occur  to  him  to  divide  that  great  aggregate  by  the  number  of 
years  it  was  accumulating,  and  to  see  that  it  has  been  yearly  only 
$14,000,000,  or  about  half  what  he  now  expects?  In  times  like 
these,  it  will  prove  no'  easy  matter  to  obtain  quite  thirteen  millions 
annually  above  the  average  heretofore. 

Smuggling  on  our  many  thousand  miles  of  frontier  sea-board  and 
inland  —  not  separated  from  all  other  nations  by  an  Atlantic  Ocean, 
as  has  been  stated,  but  often  by  a  mere  river,  or  log  fence — will  mul- 
tiply the  difficulties  in  realizing  an  increase  of  revenue  under  such 
high  duties.  It  does  not  answer  to  talk  of  an  escape  from  such  conse- 
quences, when  the  scenes  near  Castine  and  the  Canadian  frontier,  before 
and  during  the  late  war,  are  recalled  to  memory ;  and  when  we  know, 
in  the  example  of  other  nations,  that  even  royalty  has  indulged  freely 
in  the  use  of  whiskey  "  which  never  saw  the  face  of  a  ganger" 


TAKIFF.  281 

and  ladies  of  the  court  have  often  deemed  it  fashionable  to  wear  smug- 
gled gloves  and  laces.  In  fact,  more  than  half  the  silks  now  exported 
from  France  to  England  are  ascertained  to  get  into  the  latter  kingdom 
without  paying  the  duty — so  comparatively  low — of  only  thirty  per 
cent.  The  custom-house  force  in  France  amounts  to  several  thou- 
sands ;  and  in  Spain  a  constant  warfare,  even  of  force,  under  her  high 
duties,  is  obliged  to  be  waged  against  the  brigand  violators  of  such 
injudicious  laws. 

All  these  circumstances  combine  to  show  that  making  duties  high, 
when  seeking  revenue  alone,  is,  as  a  general  rule,  injudicious  and 
suicidal.  This  position  is  strengthened  by  analogy  in  the  fact,  that 
often,  when  duties  are  high,  you  increase  the  revenue  by  lowering 
them.     Hence,  Lord  John  Russell  observes : 

"  But,  upon  a  careful  view  of  our  commercial  imposts,  we  came  to  the  conclusion 
that,  by  removing  prohibitions  and  lessening  restrictions,  it  was  possible  to  replen- 
ish the  treasury,  and  at  the  same  time  to  secure  to  the  working  classes  a  greater 
command  of  the  necessaries  of  life  at  steady  and  moderate  prices." 

Without  detaining  the  Senate  by  specifying  numerous  successful 
experiments  of  this  kind,  I  would  recall  to  your  memories  that,  in 
England,  about  half  a  century  ago,  the  revenue  was  increased  nearly 
two  millions  and  a  half  of  dollars,  by  reducing  the  duty  on  spirits 
nearly  fifty  per  cent.  And  by  a  reduction  of  the  duty  on  coffee  there 
from  one  shilling  and  sixpence  per  pound  to  only  sixpence,  the  aggre- 
gate revenue  from  it  was  trebled.  A  large  increase  of  revenue  is  also 
anticipated  there  from  a  reduction  of  the  duty  on  sugar ;  and  one  has 
actually  occurred  by  such  a  course  in  Austria. 

The  effect  of  such  a  reduction  here  to  increase  imports  and  con- 
sumption is  strikingly  illustrated  by  an  official  document  of  this 
session,  now  before  me.  It  shows  that,  while  the  duty  on  sugar  here 
was  high, — from  1828  to  1834, — we  imported  and  consumed  only  about 
eighty-five  million  pounds  of  the  foreign  product  more  than  we  did  in 
the  same  number  of  years  previous ;  but  when  the  duty  was  lower  and 
falling,  during  the  last  seven  years,  —  from  1835  to  1841,  —  we  con- 
sumed of  foreign  sugar  nearly  the  vast  increase  of  four  hundred  and 
fifty-five  million  pounds  more  than  from  1828  to  1834.  Yet  this  bill, 
professedly  for  revenue  alone,  proposes  gravely  to  return  to  a  higher 
rate. 

What  more  flagrant  folly  can  there  be  than  that  which  pervades  the 
whole  system,  by  attempting  to  realize  the  largest  revenue  from 
imports  by  a  series  of  duties  so  high  and  prohibitory  as  greatly  to 
reduce  imports  ?  It  can  be  equalled  only  by  that  which,  when  embar- 
rassed for  more  revenue,  hastens  to  give  away  a  large  source  of  what 
we  already  possess,  in  the  proceeds  of  the  public  lands ;  or  that  which 
imposes  higher  taxes  and  tolls  on  foreign  commerce,  and  yet  expects, 
even  in  most  calamitous  times,  that  just  as  much  will  be  carried  and 
recarried. 

24*  . 


282  TARIFF. 

Our  experience,  in  another  respect,  seems  very  strong  against  the 
likelihood  that  this  enormous  amount  of  twenty-seven  millions  is  very 
certainly  to  be  collected  from  imports  by  the  proposed  duties.  The 
average  collections  yearly  since  1789,  as  before  stated,  under  tariffs 
at  times  very  high,  have  not  been  much  beyond  half  this  twenty-seven 
millions ;  and  each  year  in  the  table  before  me  separately  shows  that 
it  was  only  on  two  very  peculiar  and  extraordinary  occasions,  of  two 
years  each,  that  the  amount  has  ever  equalled  twenty-five  millions. 
One  of  those  periods  was  in  1815  and  1816,  after  the  privations  of 
a  three  years'  war,  and  augmented  also  by  speculations,  which  were 
felt  subsequently  in  sad  revulsions ;  and  the  other  was  in  1882  and 
1833,  when  the  importations  were  swollen  by  bringing  home  over 
ten  millions  a  year  of  State  loans,  principally  in  foreign  commodities 
for  consumption. 

But  certain  delusions  can  never  be  cured  but  by  experiments ;  and 
in  tins  case,  as  in  many  others,  we  shall  probably  be  obliged  to  witness 
that  it  is  only  the  burnt  child  that  dreads  the  fire. 

Dwelling  no  longer  on  these  considerations,  is  the  frame  of  the  bill, 
in  other  respects,  just  to  the  different  great  interests  in  society  1  Is 
it  well  adapted  to  raise  revenue  merely,  and  answer  the  purposes  of 
honest  financial  taxation  ?  In  other  words,  —  if  my  views  are  errone- 
ous, and  twenty  per  cent,  be  too  low  a  limit  for  duties  on  imports,  and 
no  compromise  prevents  an  increase,  and  more  revenue  must  be  had 
from  some  source,  and  is  likely  to  be  obtained  by  exceeding  that  limit, 
—  has  the  present  bill  gone  so  much  higher,  in  a  form  which  is  best 
suited  to  add  to  the  revenue,  and  to  render  this  kind  of  taxation 
equal?  My  impression  is,  that  duties,  when  imposed  for  revenue 
alone,  should,  in  general,  be  graduated  on  a  scale  nearly  horizontal. 
Such  has  often  been  the  usage.  Such  was  the  course  contemplated 
by  the  great  compromise  in  1833 ;  and  such  is  the  tendency  of  many 
of  the  changes  now  going  on  in  Europe.  Exceptions  can  properly  be 
made  below  the  maximum  duty,  when,  as  with  some  luxuries  easily 
smuggled,  more  revenue  could  probably  be  procured  on  a  lower  rate, 
while  some  others,  not  so  easily  smuggled,  will  at  times  yield  more 
revenue  on  a  higher  rate.  But  the  test  of  every  exception  usually  is 
the  increase  of  duty  likely  to  accrue  by  it.  Beside  this,  a  horizontal 
standard  holds  out  greater  security  for  equal  justice  in  the  whole 
taxes.  Articles  used  more  in  one  section  of  the  country  than  in 
others  cannot,  by  that,  be  taxed  highest  from  prejudices  against  that 
section ;  nor  others  used  most  by  one  class  in  society  be  taxed  highest 
from  prejudices  against  that  class.  One  great  avenue  is  thus  closed 
against  partiality  and  oppression,  and  another  against  undue  favor, 
by  taxing  too  lightly  the  most  powerful  regions,  occupations,  and 
classes. 

As  our  constitution  and  laws  are  founded  on  what  is  equal,  or,  in 
other  words,  horizontal,  respecting  the  rights  and  privileges  of  all,  the 
system  of  taxation  on  imports  should  correspond.     In  the  States,  such 


TARIFF.  283 

is  the  principle  which,  with  slight  exceptions,  pervades  the  taxation  of 
lands,  furniture,  stodK,  &c, — chiefly  in  proportion  to  value,  and  the 
rate  being  horizontal  on  the  same  value.  One  of  the  great  solaces 
under  injudicious  legislation,  and  one  of  the  preventives  to  it,  is  the 
conviction  that,  in  a  free  and  just  system,  it  must  bear  as  hardly  on 
those  who  make  the  laws  as  on  others.  But,  in  the  case  of  discrimi- 
nating duties,  to  accomplish  other  objects  than  revenue,  this  convic- 
tion is  destroyed.  Taxation  may  be  then,  and  often  is,  lightened  to 
the  law-makers,  or  to  their  influential  constituents,  and  made  more 
burdensome  to  others.  It  is  this  which  always  surrounds  a  discrimi- 
nating duty  with  danger. 

Again :  scrutinize  the  following  case  of  four  articles,  made,  for  other 
purposes  than  revenue,  to  pay  different  rates,  —  one  thirty,  one  fifty, 
one  eighty,  and  one  one  hundred  per  cent.  Now,  if  the  quantity  of 
imports  of  any  of  them  be  not  affected  by  the  discrimination,  the 
amount  of  revenue  will,  to  be  sure,  be  the  same  as  if  a  duty  of  sixty- 
five  per  cent,  was  laid  on  each.  But  the  design  is  to  protect  the 
articles  taxed  highest ;  and  hence  their  price  will  rise  most,  and  thus 
many  of  them  not  be  imported,  or  more  of  them  smuggled.  In  that 
wTay  much  revenue  will  be  lost,  and  that  on  the  very  articles  which, 
to  all  appearance,  will  yield  the  most. 

In  the  next  place,  if  the  poor  consume  the  articles,  being  neces- 
saries, on  which  eighty  or  one  hundred  per  cent,  is  imposed,  and  do  it 
as  much  or  more  than  the  rich,  then  the  tax  falls  on  them  dispropor- 
tionately to  their  property  or  means.  If  the  two  articles  paying  eighty 
and  one  hundred  per  cent,  are  also  manufactured  here,  the  poor  pay, 
thereby,  an  increased  double  tax,  by  the  higher  price  of  all  the 
domestic  articles  they  use,  without  any  indemnity,  such  as  the  rich 
capitalist  obtains  who  owns  the  manufactory.  A  horizontal  tariff  is, 
therefore,  less  open  to  favoritism  and  injustice,  and  more  in  symmetry 
with  our  equal  system  of  government.  But  this  bill,  instead  of  that, 
discriminates,  in  several  cases,  over  one  hundred,  and  in  many  over 
thirty  per  cent.  A  paramount  defect  in  the  general  structure  of  this 
bill  is,  therefore,  the  great  and  unequal  burden  which  it  imposes  on  the 
less  wealthy  classes. 

Suppose,  as  some  have,  that  the  average  tax  is  thirty-nine  per  cent., 
and  that  the  consumer,  in  consequence  of  the  duties  being  in  cash,  has 
to  pay  ten  more;  then,  in  all  cases,  the  burden  falling  on  him  will  be  near 
fifty  per  cent.  If  goods  are  imported  in  foreign  vessels  not  entering 
under  any  reciprocal  treaty  (and  some  of  the  present  party  in  power 
propose  to  put  an  end  to  all  such  treaties  and  arrangements),  the  bur- 
den will  equal  nearly  sixty  per  cent.  But  considering  it  only  at  fifty, 
how  oppressive  must  it  be  to  make  the  laborer,  mechanic,  and  farmer, 
pay  as  much  for  one  bushel  of  salt,  one  pound  of  sugar,  or  even  one 
yard  of  cotton  or  woollen  cloth,  as  he  would,  without  any  duty,  pay 
for  two !  You  deprive  those  classes,  in  this  way,  of  half  their  earn- 
ings, when  expended  for  such  articles. 


284  TARIFF. 

This  is  clearly  too  high ;  and,  at  the  same  time,  it  is  disproportion- 
ate among  classes,  as  well  as  different  kinds  of  property.  These 
characteristics  are  what  made  the  poll-tax  so  oppressive  which  led  to 
Wat  Tyler's  rebellion.  Thus,  in  England,  lately,  it  has  been  com- 
puted that  a  small  householder  pays,  for  himself  and  family,  nearly 
half  his  earnings  in  taxes  of  some  kind  or  other,  while  the  great  land- 
lord or  banker  pays  not  one-tenth  of  his.  So  the  small  farmer  here, 
and  especially  in  the  Atlantic  States,  with  ten  in  his  family,  pays, 
as  some  compute,  over  fifty  dollars  yearly,  under  a  tariff  like  this ; 
while  the  great  capitalist,  with  twenty  times  as  much  property  and 
income,  will  pay  little  or  nothing  more  under  it  than  he. 

This  is  another  practical  illustration  of  the  unequal  operation  of  this 
kind  of  taxation,  when  pushed,  for  any  cause,  too  high.  How  wisely, 
under  the  sufferings  of  the  poor  and  humble  in  life  which  flow  from 
heavy  taxes  on  them,  did  the  sagacious  heroine,  Joan  of  Arc,  in  the 
height  of  her  glory,  ask,  as  the  greatest  favor  from  the  monarch  of 
France  to  those  she  loved  most,  that  the  people  of  her  native  village 
might  thereafter  be  exempt  from  taxation !  The  blessed  boon  was 
granted,  and  held  sacred  for  centuries ;  while  all  now  asked,  in  this 
bill,  for  the  people,  or  any  part  of  them,  is  not  exemption  from  their 
due  share  of  taxes,  not  exclusive  privileges,  but  merely  the  sacred 
right,  the  inestimable,  holy  right,  of  being  exempt  from  unequal  and 
unjust  taxation. 

To  show  that  these  objections  to  the  character  and  frame  of  the  bill 
are  not  declamation,  nor  loose  generalities  for  political  effect,  let  me 
ask  your  attention  a  few  moments  to  some  tabular  details. 

Thus,  the  first  statement  before  me  exhibits  the  different  rates  of 
duty,  on  an  average,  under  all  our  previous  tariffs.  From  this  it 
appears  that  the  average  is  higher  by  this  bill  than  by  any  others, 
except  that  of  1828;  and  that  the  burden  which  falls  on  the  consumer, 
through  its  rate  of  duty  and  cash  payments,  is  greater  than  ever  fell  on 
him  before,  since  the  government  began.  In  this  way,  it  quite  equals 
forty-six  to  forty-nine  per  cent. ;  while  the  tariff  of  1828  —  the  duty 
being  the  only  burden  —  did  not  exceed  forty-five  per  cent.  Under 
the  act  of  1824,  which  the  chairman  admits  was  made  so  high  for  pro- 
tection, and  not  revenue,  the  average  was  only  about  thirty-five  per 
cent. ;  and  under  that  of  1816,  not  quite  thirty.  Of  the  different 
tariffs  previous  to  the  war, — made,  as  we  say,  for  revenue  alone, — the 
average  of  that  from  1800  to  1808  was  only  twenty  per  cent. ;  and 
of  those  from  1789  to  1792,  and  thence  to  1800,  only  twelve  and  a 
half,  and  then  fifteen,  and  then  twenty  per  cent.  So  that,  if  the  acts 
of  1824  and  1828  were  made  so  high,  and  in  so  discriminating  a  form, 
not  for  revenue,  —  as  more  revenue  was  not  then  wanted,  —  but  for 
protection  alone  to  manufacturers,  who  did  want  it,  who  loaded  your 
tables  with  memorials  for  it,  who  thundered  at  your  doors  till  they 
obtained  it, —  then  is  this  bill,  in  its  form  and  tendency,  a  measure  for 
protection.     For  it  is  exactly  like  those  in  its  discriminations,  like 


TARIFF.  285 

them  in  its  effects,  and  (whatever  it  may  be  called,  to  varnish  over  the 
real  object)  it  is  like  them  in  substance.  Revenue,  to  be  sure,  is  now 
wanted ;  but  this  bill  is  not  in  a  form  to  give  most  revenue,  being  so 
high  in  the  average,  as  well  as  in  numerous  particulars,  as  to  prevent 
importations  so  large  as  with  lower  duties.  The  measure  was  also 
thrown  into  its  present  protective  form  by  a  protective  Secretary,  pro- 
tective Committees  on  Manufactures,  as  w^ell  as  Ways  and  Means,  and, 
as  in  1828,  at  the  urgent  supplications  of  the  friends  of  high  protec- 
tion to  manufactures,  as  well  as  of  the  manufacturers  themselves. 

On  this  subject,  legislation  is  often  pushed  to  an  extreme,  —  some- 
times from  self-interest,  and  the  ability  among  manufacturers  to  com- 
bine more  readily  than  farmers,  and,  by  active  importunity,  to  influence 
more  the  legislation  of  Congress.  The  grasshoppers  under  the  tree, 
says  Burke,  keep  up  much  more  excitement  and  noise  than  the  oxen. 
Sometimes,  too,  there  is,  doubtless,  an  honest  belief  that  a  tariff, 
instead  of  being  (like  all  other  taxes)  a  burden,  is  a  blessing.  That 
is  one  of  the  notable  discoveries  of  certain  modern  sages  among  us. 
But  a  tariff  cannot  possibly  be  a  general  blessing,  when  equally  bur- 
dening all ;  but  very  possibly  a  blessing  to  the  manufacturers  alone, 
when  unequal,  and  they  reap  the  benefit  of  the  tax  at  the  cost  of 
others.  With  them,  it  is  regarded,  therefore,  as  a  sovereign  remedy 
for  all  political  bruises,  a  panacea  for  every  social  derangement  in  the 
body  politic. 

Particular  items,  as  strongly  as  the  origin,  resemblances,  and  high 
average  rate  of  duty,  indicate  the  protective,  rather  than  the  financial 
character  of  this  bill.  Here,  sir,  is  a  list  of  sixteen  prominent  arti- 
cles, whose  duty,  when  reduced  to  an  ad  valorem  scale,  ranges  from 
fifty  to  one  hundred  and  fifty  per  cent. ;  and  here  is  another  list  of 
seven  articles,  six  of  wliich  are  above  twenty-five  per  cent.,  and  all 
above  twenty.  So  are  numerous  others  in  the  bill,  which  I  have  not 
taken  the  trouble  to  compute  and  exhibit. 

The  value  abroad,  with  the  charges,  are  by  law  the  basis  on  which 
duties  are  now  assessed. 

By  this  mode,  according  to  the  custom-house  books  for  1840  (and 
prices,  generally,  are  still  lower  now),  the  Secretary  himself  shows,  in 
document  209,  House  of  Representatives,  at  this  session,  that  the  pro- 
posed duty  on  one  kind  of  cordage  would  yield  over  one  hundred  and 
fifty  per  cent.,  and  on  black  pepper  an  equal  rate;  and  so  downward, 
after  due  allowance,  with  various  other  articles,  as  set  forth  in  the  table. 

Can  there  be  a  pretence  that  any  of  these,  except  a  few,  considered 
by  some  as  luxuries,  have  been  raised  so  high  for  revenue,  wdien,  with 
those  exceptions,  all  made  so  high  are  articles  of  wliich  there  are  rival 
manufacturers  in  this  country,  and  where  many  other  important  arti- 
cles, of  which  no  rival  manufacturers  exist  here,  are  not  raised  high  1 

If  the  high  duties  are  imposed  on  the  first  to  obtain  more  revenue 
on  them,  why  is  it  not  placed  on  the  others  for  the  same  purpose  ? 
The  only  honest  answer  must  be,  that  the  right  to  discriminate  in 


286  TARIFF. 

this  revenue  is  believed  to  exist,  and  that  it  is  proper  to  exercise  it 
in  such  an  unequal  manner  for  the  protection  of  the  manufacturers 
concerned. 

If  the  bill  of  1828  did  that,  for  such  a  purpose,  as  has  been  repeat- 
edly admitted,  this  twin-sister  does  it  in  various  respects.  If  that  had 
its  minimums  solely  for  protection,  so  has  this.  This,  too,  beside 
being,  as  before  shown,  equally  high  in  its  average  burdens,  is  equally 
high  in  many  of  its  discriminations;  and  higher  in  some, — such  as 
cordage  and  cotton  bagging,  when  we  advert  to  the  lower  price  of  the 
articles  now, — higher  in  carpeting  and  coal  and  some  kinds  of  glass ;  in 
blankets,  wares,  cutlery  and  steel ;  higher  in  both  sugars  and  silks, 
when  the  diminished  value  is  regarded ;  and,  without  specifying  several 
more,  it  is  seven  and  a  half  per  cent,  higher  in  the  large  class  of  arti- 
cles not  enumerated. 

If  it  be  lower  in  a  few  instances,  it  is,  as  a  general  rule,  either 
nominally  so, — the  specific  duty  being  less  on  the  article,  because  the 
latter  is  now  proportionably  less  in  value,  as  in  the  case  of  molasses, — 
or  it  is  really  so  in  articles  not  produced  here,  like  tea  or  coffee ;  and 
hence  no  higher  duty  was  desired  by  the  manufacturers  for  protection. 
Thus,  whether  it  goes  higher  or  lower  in  reality,  it  is  still  carefully  so 
with  a  view  to  aid  manufactures  in  all  the  material  changes, —  making 
some  immaterial  ones  as  to  agriculture  and  commerce,  to  keep  up 
appearances,  without  much  beneficial  addition  thereby,  either  to  their 
protection  or  the  real  income  of  the  treasury.  I  concede  that  the 
naked  political  power  thus  to  discriminate  may  exist ;  but  it  is  not 
within  the  spirit  of  the  constitution — not,  as  before  shown,  advantage- 
ous for  revenue — to  exercise  it  in  this  way;  nor  just  to  most  of  the  con- 
sumers, so  unequally  taxed  without  an  equivalent,  like  the  manufac- 
tures ;  nor  is  it  true  to  the  letter  or  spirit  of  the  compromise,  nor 
useful  even  to  sound  manufacturers  themselves,  much  less  to  all  the 
interests  of  society  combined.  I  say  this  from  no  hostility  to  taxation 
for  the  economical  support  of  government,  but  from  hostility  to 
excessive  taxation  —  unnecessary  and  unequal  taxation.  Nor  am 
I  unfriendly  to  due  protection  to  manufactures,  or  any  other  useful 
occupation ;  but  unfriendly  to  partial  protection,  —  to  the  protection 
which  favors  one,  and  neglects  or  oppresses  another, — and,  as  in  this 
case,  favors  manufactures,  at  the  expense  and  injury  of  agriculture 
and  commerce.  It  is  no  extenuation  for  this  injustice  to  allege,  as  is 
often  done,  that  the  prosperity  of  one  class  in  society  redounds  to  the 
benefit  of  all ;  because  that  never  happens  when  one  class  is  made  pros- 
perous by  the  undue  taxation  or  plunder  of  other  classes.  No  taxa- 
tion, unless  unequal,  can  ever  be  advantageous  to  the  pecuniary  interests 
of  any  of  the  tax-payers ;  and  if  it  becomes  so  then,  it  is  advantageous 
only  to  those  directly  burdened  least,  and  indirectly  remunerated 
most.  "Who  can  believe  that,  if  this  last  were  not  the  consequence  to 
the  manufacturers  from  a  tariff  like  this,  it  would  be  invoked,  even 
by  them,  as  a  blessing,  and  not,  rather,  be  deprecated  by  all  as  an 


TARIFF.  287 

evil,  and  prevented,  as  far  as  is  practicable,  consistent  with  the  support 
of  public  credit  and  the  ordinary  operations  of  government  ?  But  for 
this  inequality,  would  not  others,  as  much  as  they,  desire  it  to  pass  7 
Are  they  not  as  patriotic  to  grant  suitable  revenues,  and  as  intelligent 
concerning  what  promotes  their  own  interests,  as  are  the  manufac- 
turers ?  Nor  can  there  be  anything  in  the  pretence  that  the  farmer 
and  merchant  are,  in  this  bill,  assisted  by  direct  protection  to  half  the 
extent  of  the  manufacturers.  If,  by  some  mysterious  process,  it  con- 
fers equal  benefits  on  them  by  indirect  protection,  why  not  reverse  the 
rule,  and  give  to  them,  the  most  numerous,  the  largest  direct  protec- 
tion, and  to  manufacturers  the  indirect,  so  much  eulogized  1  But,  so 
far  from  this,  every  class  is  sagacious  enough  to  know,  like  the 
Scotchman  as  to  his  red  herring,  that  if  there  is  to  be  direct  protection 
at  all,  he  had  better  get  it  than  his  neighbor.  If,  as  some  pretend, 
the  former  protective  tariffs,  as  well  as  this,  bestow  direct  protection 
on  all,  like  the  promises  of  Tittlebat  Titmouse  to  do  everything  for 
everybody,  I  would  respectfully  ask  what  benefit  that  kind  of  a  tariff 
could  have  been  to  any  of  them,  except  to  cause  a  loss  of  the  whole 
expense  of  administering  it  1  If  A,  the  manufacturer,  is  protected  by 
a  tax  of  five  dollars  on  B,  the  farmer,  and  another  five  on  C,  the  mer- 
chant, and  B  is  also  protected  by  a  tax  of  five  on  A  and  another  five 
on  C,  and  C  by  a  tax  of  five  on  B  and  another  five  on  A,  will  gentle- 
men inform  me  how  much  more  prosperous  and  wealthy  either  of  them 
has  become  by  the  transaction  1  The  farmer,  in  particular,  has  not 
considered  himself  well  used  in  this  system  of  protection  heretofore. 
Allow  me  to  read,  on  this,  a  few  resolutions,  said  to  have  passed  at  a 
meeting  of  that  class  of  persons  in  Massachusetts ;  and  though  they 
are  not  a  discontented,  annoying,  petitioning  race,  they  sometimes 
resolve  very  firmly,  and  execute  quite  as  sternly  at  the  ballot-boxes. 

**  "Whereas  the  general  happiness  and  prosperity  of  the  United  States  must  ever  be 
intimately  connected  with  the  condition  of  our  agriculture  :  and  whereas  three-fourths 
of  our  whole  rapidly  increasing  population  must  and  ever  will  depend  on  the  products 
and  profits  of  the  farmer,  for  the  supply  of  their  physical  wants,  and  the  means  of 
moral,  religious,  and  intellectual  improvement : 

"And  whereas  Congress  has  given  bounties  on  the  fisheries,  to  make  them  a 
nursery  of  seamen,  and  has  given  none  on  agriculture,  which  is  the  best  nursery  of 
freemen  ;  has  appropriated  millions  annually  to  protect  commerce,  and  has  given 
nothing  to  encourage  agriculture,  the  basis  of  commerce  ;  has  protected  manufac- 
tures with  a  heavy  tariff,  and  left  agriculture,  which  consumes  their  fabrics,  to  pro- 
tect herself : 

"  Resolved,  That  it  is  the  duty  of  the  General  Government  not  to  extend  protection 
and  encouragement  to  manufactures  and  commerce,  unless  she  adopts  a  like  policy 
towards  the  great  agricultural  interests  of  the  country. 

"  Resolved,  That  the  protective  system,  as  at  present  established,  is  manifestly 
unjust  to  the  agriculturists  of  the  country  ;  imposing  upon  them  three-fourths  of  the 
tariff  duties,  as  consumers,  without  affording  them  any  adequate  consideration  for  the 
payment  of  their  tariff  taxes. 

"  Resolved,  That  if  the  manufacturer  is  to  receive  a  protective  duty,  so  should  also 
the  American  seed-grower,  who,  in  consequence  of  the  importation  of  foreign  seeds 
into  the  United  States,  is  obliged  to  abandon  this  profitable  branch  of  industry. 

"  Resolved,  That  the  business  of  wool-growing  has  become  unprofitable,  and  cannot 


288  TARIFF. 

safely  be  followed  by  our  farmers  under  the  provisions  of  the  present  tariff,  which 
admits  all  kinds  of  wool  of  less  value  than  eight  cents  per  pound  at  the  place  from 
whence  it  is  imported,  duty  free,  of  such  qualities  as  come  in  direct  competition  with 
our  wool  of  coarser  quality  ;  therefore, 

"  Resolved,  That  it  will  be  the  imperative  duty  of  the  American  farmer  to  protest 
against  a  tariff  to  protect  the  manufacturers,  if  nothing  more  be  done  to  protect  this 
important  business  from  foreign  competition. 

"  Resolved,  That  the  present  tariff  is  partial  and  unequal  to  farmers,  wherein  it 
provides  that  the  duties  on  railroad  iron  shall  be  refunded  when  the  rails  are  actually 
laid,  and  does  not  provide  that  the  duties  on  the  scythe  and  the  sickle  shall  be  refunded 
to  the  farmer  when  he  shall  have  applied  them  to  the  grain. 

"  And  whereas  large  quantities  of  potatoes,  grain,  butter,  cheese,  pork,  wool,  hides, 
and  other  articles,  are  annually  imported  from  foreign  countries  into  the  United 
States  ;  therefore, 

"  Resolved,  That  it  is  not  the  interest  or  the  duty  of  the  farmers  to  submit  to  be 
taxed  to  build  up  commerce  and  manufactures,  unless  they  also  can  be  protected  in 
the  full  enjoyment  of  the  home  market  for  all  our  great  agricultural  staples." 

But  it  may  be  replied  that  the  present  bill  remedies  some  of  those 
complaints,  by  raising  duties  higher,  to  protect  a  few  of  those  articles 
of  agricultural  origin.  In  doing  that,  however,  mere  appearances 
seem  to  have  been  consulted ;  because,  in  reality,  the  farmer  is  placed 
in  a  much  worse  condition  by  the  whole  bill  than  he  would  be  with- 
out it,  under  the  existing  laws.  Thus,  the  duty  on  eight  agricultural 
products  from  abroad  has  been  raised,  by  the  report  of  the  committee 
in  the  other  House,  over  the  Secretary's  bill,  a  few  cents  per  pound, 
barrel,  or  bushel ;  as  on  butter,  cheese,  Indian  corn,  flour,  lard,  meal, 
potatoes,  and  wool.  This  looks  on  its  face  very  kind,  as  well  as  pro- 
tective. But  none  of  those  articles,  except  wool  and  cheese,  are 
imported  to  any  great  extent,  or  are  likely  to  be  dangerous  rivals  to 
our  domestic  products  of  the  same  name ;  and  the  duties,  old  and  new, 
on  the  whole  of  these,  would  probably  be  less  than  fifty  thousand 
dollars  a  year.  But,  at  the  same  moment,  the  duty  on  salt,  which 
farmers  are  obliged  to  consume  in  the  largest  proportion,  has,  by 
this  bill,  been  increased  from  its  present  rate  of  twenty  per  cent, 
to  quite  eighty  per  cent.  There  has  thus  been  added  to  the  price 
of  what  the  farming  interest  consume  of  that  article  near  half  a  mil- 
lion of  dollars.  Vast  kindness,—  to  bestow  fifty  thousand  dollars 
with  one  hand,  and  take  back  with  the  other  ten  times  the  amount ! 
Admirable  protection, —  to  relieve  them  by  higher  protection  equal  to 
about  fifty  thousand  dollars  of  new  duties,  but  at  the  same  moment  to 
burden  them  by  new  ones,  on  one  article  alone,  near  five  hundred 
thousand  !  But  the  secret,  in  respect  to  this  last  article,  is,  that  the 
increase  benefits  the  manufacturers  of  it.  For  the  same  reason,  an 
increase  was  proposed  on  several  other  manufactured  articles,  and  one 
raw  material  lowered,  to  aid  the  soap-makers,  though  produced  by  the 
farmer  here.  I  concede,  however,  that  this  bill,  after  a  severe  struggle, 
has  been  made  to  impose  a  duty  on  hides,  which  is  favorable  to  agri- 
culture. But  it  is  very  small,  and  is  neutralized, —  indeed,  exceeded 
ten  times  over, —  by  the  increased  tax  on  iron,  cordage,  cottons,  lin- 
ens, glass,  and  various  other  articles  of  extensive  consumption  among 


TARIFF.  289 

farmers,  independent  of  salt.  Indeed,  the  very  tax  imposed  on  hides, 
professedly  for  their  benefit,  is  another  excuse  for  a  high  tax  on  leather 
and  shoes,  which  farmers  consume  so  largely ;  and  the  duty  on  wool, 
raised  some,  professedly  to  aid  them,  is  also  countenanced  by  a  higher 
duty  on  several  kinds  of  woollens  and  worsteds.  This  is  a  specimen 
of  the  ridiculous  round  which  such  a  forced,  unnatural,  hot-bed  sys- 
tem, is  obliged  to  run ;  and  if  a  single  raw  material  from  agriculture, 
entering  into  our  manufactures,  is  visited  with  a  higher  duty,  avowedly 
to  protect  the  farmer,  you  proceed  at  once  to  pick  his  pocket  again  of 
more  than  the  amount,  by  raising  some  duty  still  more  on  a  manufac- 
ture he  uses,  and  sometimes  on  the  very  manufacture  made  from  his 
raw  material.  By  the  viciousness  of  such  a  system,  the  English  have 
discovered  that  the  manufacturer  was  so  escaping  his  fair  share  of  tax- 
ation on  imports,  that  Parliament  was  obliged,  in  order  to  render  the 
whole  burden  of  taxation  more  equal,  to  impose  an  excise  duty  on  sev- 
eral articles  of  domestic  manufacture.  From  like  circumstances,  if  we 
pass  this  bill  unamended,  there  will  be  so  many  duties  nearly  prohib- 
itory for  the  benefit  of  the  manufacturer ;  and  the  rest  of  the  tariff, 
on  which  the  duties  are  paid,  will  fall  so  much  more  heavily  on  other 
classes,  that  the  deficient  revenue  will  continue,  if  our  expenses  are 
not  reduced  and  the  lands  recalled,  and  will  have  to  be  made  up, 
probably,  from  other  sources,  reaching  more  equally  the  manufacturer. 

In  that  event,  as  the  revenue  will  have  been  injured  for  the  benefit 
of  the  manufacturer,  what  more  suitable  mode  of  obtaining  the  defi- 
ciency than  one  which  will  fall  on  him  in  a  more  equal  proportion,  and 
thus  tend  to  equalize  nearer  the  benefits  and  burdens  of  all  classes  1 
The  English  corn-laws,  so  much  railed  at,  were,  in  one  view,  at  home, 
a  mode  of  making  the  manufacturer  pay  something  to  the  farmer  for 
the  high  protective  duties  he  had  obtained  on  some  of  his  own  prod- 
ucts ;  and  for  the  burdens,  flung  chiefly  on  the  agricultural  interest, 
to  maintain  the  starving  paupers  among  manufacturers,  when  deprived 
of  employment  by  some  of  those  revulsions  so  common  to  that  branch 
of  business.  Indeed,  the  far-reaching  sagacity  of  Hamilton  saw  that, 
even  in  ordinary  cases,  the  manufacturing  States  would  consume  less 
of  foreign  imports,  in  proportion  to  their  numbers  and  wealth,  than 
the  agricultural  States ;  and  hence  he  urged  it  as  an  argument  why 
the  General  Government  should  have  the  power,  when  taxes  became 
high,  to  impose  part  of  them  on  other  property,  in  order  to  make  the 
manufacturing  sections  bear,  as  they  ought,  a  more  equal  proportion 
of  the  public  burdens.     (Fed.,  No.  35.) 

Do  not  gentlemen  see,  also,  that,  in  respect  to  revenue  on  imports, 
this  system  soon  kills  the  goose  that  lays  the  golden  egg  1  If  manu- 
factures are  increased  by  it  sufficiently  to  supply  the  home  market,  so 
that  fewer  articles  are  imported, —  and  if  most  of  the  free  articles  are, 
also,  raw  materials  for  manufacture,  and  yield  no  revenue, —  it  follows, 
inevitably,  that  much  of  the  income  heretofore  derived  from  imports 
must  gradually  disappear ;  and,  as  a  fiscal  system  of  taxation,  it  will, 


290  TARIFF. 

in  time,  prove  a  felo  de  se  —  destroying  itself.  Then,  for  most  of  our 
revenue,  would  remain  only  the  expensive,  unpopular  and  deprecated 
alternatives  of  excise  and  direct  taxes. 

There  is  another  illustration,  somewhat  striking,  of  the  partial  oper- 
ation of  the  general  structure  of  this  bill  upon  agriculture.  The 
highest  duty,  in  a  list  of  sixteen  articles,  is  on  cordage  untarred,  and 
another  of  eighty  per  cent,  on  cordage  tarred.  These  are  articles  used 
extensively,  not  only  in  navigation,  but  on  every  farm,  and  in  almost 
every  log-cabin.  The  next  is  coarse  cottons,  from  twenty-five  to  the 
monstrous  rate  of  one  hundred  and  forty  per  cent., —  wanted  for  cloth- 
ing and  bedding  whenever  a  ship  sails,  a  fort  is  manned,  a  plough 
driven,  a  cow  milked,  or  a  laborer  sleeps.  In  this  manner,  the  whole 
list  might  be  run  through,  and  all  above  fifty  per  cent.,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  two  or  three,  and  all,  but  a  like  number,  between  fifty  and 
thirty-five  per  cent.,  would  be  found  among  the  leading  necessaries  of 
life, —  including,  besides  what  have  been  named,  several  species  of 
iron,  woollens,  salt,  sugar,  coal,  wares,  molasses,  paper,  linens,  &c. 
How  wretchedly  must  the  discriminating  policy  be  exercised,  when,  in 
a  republic,  the  numerous  masses  are  taxed,  on  their  greatest  necessa- 
ries, from  sixty  to  one  hundred  and  forty  per  cent.,  while  wines,  the 
luxury  of  the  few  and  affluent,  pay  only  about  fifty  per  cent.,  foreign 
delicacies  in  fruits  about  the  same,  and  silks,  generally,  but  thirty  or 
forty  per  cent. !  What  deserves  further  notice  is,  also,  the  fact,  that 
among  the  articles  which,  in  England,  pay  only  the  more  moderate 
duty  of  twenty  per  cent.,  are  the  universal  necessaries  of  iron  and 
cotton,  while  here  they  are  manufactures  of  tobacco.  In  the  free  list 
here  are,  also,  "gold  epaulettes"  and  the  poisonous  " nux vomica ;" 
while  there  it  is  salt, —  the  healthy  inmate  of  every  dwelling,  from  the 
hut  to  the  palace,  but  much  the  most  extensively  consumed  in  agricul- 
ture. 

Again :  of  the  nine  or  ten  articles,  in  another  table  before  me,  which, 
in  England,  have  heretofore  yielded  twenty  out  of  twenty-two  parts 
of  all  her  gross  revenue  from  imports,  one  of  them  is  grain ;  and, 
without  commending  the  policy  of  the  corn-laws  generally,  it  has  been 
much  protected,  either  directly  or  indirectly,  in  favor  of  her  agricul- 
ture at  home.  Three  of  the  other  eight  are  protected  in  the  same  way 
for  the  agriculture  of  her  colonies ;  while,  among  our  ten  highest,  not 
one  is  an  agricultural  article, —  and  thus  not  one  of  them  is  protected, 
either  directly  or  indirectly.  And  in  the  eight  next,  there  is  but  one; 
and  that  is  now  protected,  for  the  first  time,  only  by  a  very  low  rate 
of  duty. 

Sugar  is,  in  some  respects,  an  exception  in  both  countries,  as  the 
cane  from  which  it  is  made  is  grown  by  agriculture  ;  but  any  benefit 
from  that  is  almost  exclusively  confined  here  to  one  of  the  small  States, 
out  of  the  whole  twenty-six,  and  where  the  growing  of  cotton,  instead 
of  it,  would  prove  quite  as  profitable.  I  pass  by  further  comparisons 
which  occur  to  me,  connected  with  the  lower  differential  duties  England 


TARIFF.  291 

imposes  on  articles  from  her  colonies,  and  from  which,  on  those  lower 
duties,  come  most  of  the  imports  which  yield  the  greatest  revenue.  I 
pass  by  the  strong  contrast  between  her  whole  impost  system  and  ours, 
in  the  fact,  that,  deducting  luxuries,  the  necessaries  of  life  imported 
there  do  not,  on  an  average,  now  pay  over  twenty-five  per  cent.,  while 
here  they  exceed  that  near  ten  per  cent.,  and  thus  fall  most  heavily 
on  the  laboring  classes.  Bad,  then,  as  has  been  the  English  system 
in  some  respects,  this  one  concerning  imports  is  worse,  and  especially 
towards  the  agricultural  interest. 

How  can  we  consistently  pass  such  measures  as  this,  and  continue 
to  rail  at  England  for  her  corn-laws,  when  now  her  duties  on  grain  are 
lower  than  half  of  those  in  the  present  bill  ?  Nor  will  it  become  us  to 
complain  longer  that  she  excludes  our  grain  by  high  imposts,  when 
she  takes  three-fourths  directly,  or  indirectly  through  her  colonies,  of 
all  we  export.  Nor  to  talk  of  retaliatory  duties,  when  ours  now  on 
her  cotton,  iron,  woollens,  and  crockery-ware,  are  nearly  double  as 
high  as  hers  on  our  grain  ;  and  when,  if  she  oppresses  the  great  mass 
of  her  population,  and  drives  many  into  insurrection  by  her  corn-taxes, 
we  oppress  ours  much  more  by  taxes  on  all  which  is  used  to  protect 
from  nakedness  and  cold,  as  well  as  all  which  enables  our  people,  in 
the  use  of  iron  and  cordage,  to  till  the  earth  for  bread,  or  navigate  the 
ocean  for  gain.  So,  more  than  half  of  these  nine  leading  articles  in 
England,  which  yield  most  of  her  revenue,  —  such  as  spirits,  wines, 
tobacco,  fruits,  &c, —  are  manifestly  luxuries.  There,  the  great  mass 
of  the  revenue  is  collected  from  the  rich,  who  can  afford  to  use  luxu- 
ries, however  highly  taxed.  But  here,  our  nine  or  ten  articles,  which 
are  expected  to  yield  most  revenue  by  this  bill,  and  which  will  yield 
near  twenty  parts  out  of  twenty-seven,  if  it  succeeds  as  its  friends 
expect,  are  all  necessaries,  and  even  agricultural  necessaries,  except 
two  —  spirits  and  silks.  What  a  contrast !  There,  not  half  the  articles 
yielding  most  are  necessaries.  Here,  eight-tenths  of  them !  There, 
only  what  goes  into  the  mouth  is  taxed  high.  Here,  what  goes  upon 
the  back,  as  well  as  into  the  mouth.  Has  this  been  done  to  get  more 
revenue  here,  when  England  is  so  much  deeper  in  debt,  and  ought 
to  be  so  much  more  taxed  ? 

Can  neither  the  back  nor  the  mouth  be  allowed  to  escape  here, 
where  the  people  at  large  are  pretended  to  be  so  much  less  burdened, 
and  to  have  so  much  more  weight  in  public  affairs  ?  No,  sir.  The 
difference  is,  that  here  our  only  privileged  class  supply  clothing  for 
the  masses,  while  there  one  of  their  privileged  classes  supplies  food. 
Hence,  the  farmer  is  here  heavily  taxed ;  and  hence,  under  the  pretence 
of  revenue,  the  people  at  large  are  to  be  made  tributary  to  the  manu- 
facturers, and  to  be  ground  down  to  the  earth  with  high  duties  on  the 
greatest  necessaries,  to  help  build  up  that  privileged  class. 

Some  talk,  even,  as  if  there  was  a  sacredness,  or  Divine  right,  con- 
nected with  them,  and  all  legislation  was  to  be  shaped  for  their  pro- 
tection alone  !     If  you  question  their  exclusive  pretensions  over  agri- 


292  TARIFF. 

culture  and  commerce,  the  reproach  is,  you  are  hostile  to  American 
labor.  Is  no  labor  American  but  theirs  1  If  you  oppose  high  dis- 
criminations for  them,  and  them  alone,  you  are  vilified  as  an  enemy 
to  domestic  industry.  Is  there  no  domestic  industry  in  the  plough, 
and  scythe,  and  ship,  as  well  as  in  a  spinning-jenny,  or  loom  ? 

If  you  favor  a  tariff  for  revenue,  and  not  protection  to  a  single  class, 
it  is  imputed  to  you  that  your  wish  springs  from  opposition  to  the 
American  system, —  as  if  the  true  American  system  was  not  that  of 
equal  rights  and  equal  taxation ;  or,  should  you  be  so  impartial  as  not 
to  like  a  home  league  for  manufactures  alone,  you  are  denounced  for 
want  of  patriotism, —  as  if  there  were  not  home  crops,  home  herds  of 
cattle,  and  home  flocks  of  sheep,  to  be  encouraged,  as  much  as  the  man- 
ufacture of  soda-ash,  or  vermicelli,  or  pins.  The  agricultural  inter- 
ests are  in  this  way  misled  or  neglected.  It  may  be  undesignedly,  yet 
still  it  is  done. 

If  those  behind  the  curtain  were,  by  this  bill,  seeking  revenue  alone, 
and  did  not  intend  to  blind  the  farmers  about  protection,  by  raising  the 
duty  on  such  articles  as  butter,  wheat,  flour,  and  lard,  why  did  they 
select  that  which  has  so  little  competition  from  abroad,  and  at  the  same 
moment  yields  so  little  revenue  ?  The  fact  could  hardly  be  credited, 
if  not  in  the  official  document  before  me,  that  the  revenue  from  butter, 
by  this  change,  held  out  as  merely  financial,  would  be  increased  only 
four  hundred  dollars,  that  from  wheat-flour  only  eighty-three  dollars, 
and  that  from  lard, —  in  the  distressing  wants  of  the  treasury  for  near 
twenty-seven  millions, — not  quite  the  great  fiscal  aggregate  of  ninety- 
eight  cents !  This,  as  financiering,  must  astonish  Europe.  Why  not 
be  open,  manly,  straight-forward? 

Where  are  the  drawbacks,  too,  for  the  aid  of  farmers  1  None  on 
their  salt  consumed,  or  their  iron;  while  on  the  first  you  allow  a 
drawback  to  the  fisheries,  and  on  the  last  to  the  proprietors  of  rail- 
roads. 

What  drawback  is  allowed  on  the  molasses  consumed  in  raising  and 
shipping  their  surplus  crops  —  the  fruit  of  their  labor  and  capital  1  — 
or  on  their  cotton-bagging,  or  their  sugar  ?  But  large  drawbacks  are 
granted  to  the  manufacturers  of  spirit  from  molasses,  and  of  refined 
sugar,  when  shipped  abroad,  as  the  fruit  of  manufacturing  labor  and 
capital. 

Another  characteristic  of  the  details  of  the  bill,  exceedingly  unjust 
and  unequal  to  the  agricultural  and  other  laboring  classes,  is,  that,  by 
the  rate  of  duty,  when  specific,  whatever  may  be  its  superiority  in 
some  cases  over  an  ad  valorem  rate  for  securing  revenue,  it  is  so  used 
here  as  to  make  the  secondary  quality  and  value  of  any  article  of  the 
same  name,  and  which,  of  course,  is  most  used  by  the  least  wealthy, 
pay  as  high  a  duty  nominally,  and  a  much  higher  one  really,  on  its 
value,  than  is  paid  on  the  more  fashionable  and  costly  fabric  used  by 
the  rich.  Without  fatiguing  the  Senate  by  many  details  on  this,  take 
the  articles  only  of  shoes  and  flannels.     The  silk  shoe,  worn  in  the 


TARIFF.  293 

ball-room  or  soiree,  pays  no  higher  duty  than  the  cowhide  shoe,  worn 
by  the  sailor,  laborer,  or  ploughman.  So  the  coarse  flannel  used  by 
the  industrious  classes  is  not  only  very  highly  taxed,  but  has  to  pay 
just  as  much  duty  per  yard  as  the  finest  fabric  used  by  the  wealthiest. 

Where,  also,  is  the  free  list  of  articles  to  aid  agriculture?  For 
protection  is  afforded  by  letting  the  articles  used  by  particular  classes 
come  in  free,  as  effectually  as  by  taxing  rival  articles  high. 

The  whole  free  list  for  the  manufacturers  would  fill  almost  a  page : 
such  as  models  of  machinery,  berries,  nuts  and  vegetables  used  for 
dying;  all  dye-woods;  old  metals  in  brass,  copper,  pewter,  &c,  to  be 
manufactured;  crude  brimstone,  gums,  madder,  India-rubber,  kelp, 
barilla,  wood,  palm  leaf  and  oil,  reeds,  &c. ;  while  the  free  list  to  aid 
farmers  consists  only  of  "  animals  for  breed"  and  "  plaster  of  Paris." 

To  pursue  this  course,  when  agriculture  and  commerce  have  such 
superior  claims  to  extraordinary  protection,  if  granted  at  all  to  any 
class,  is  more  especially  unjust  and  suicidal  to  the  best  interests  of  the 
whole  community. 

Why,  sir,  the  value  of  property  of  all  kinds  in  this  country  is  esti- 
mated at  four  thousand  millions  of  dollars.  Of  this,  at  least  three 
thousand  millions  (or  three-fourths  of  the  whole)  belong  to  agricul- 
ture ;  and  is  that  three-fourths  to  be  neglected,  for  only  a  small  pittance 
in  manufactures  mixed  up  with  the  other  one -fourth  ?  All  the  capital 
in  the  latter  employment  appears,  by  the  last  census,  to  be  only  two 
hundred  and  sixty-seven  millions  and  a  fraction ;  while  the  capital  in 
commerce  and  navigation  alone  exceeds  it  more  than  a  hundred 
millions,  and  that  in  agriculture  exceeds  it  over  two  thousand  seven 
hundred  millions. 

Generalities  can  hardly  impress  us  strongly  enough  with  the  great 
magnitude  of  the  interests  in  agriculture,  compared  with  those  engaged 
in  manufactures. 

Here  is  a  table,  sir,  compiled  from  the  last  census,  as  corrected. 
Fair  computations  of  prices  on  it  show  that  the  crop,  in  one  year,  of 
only  eight  agricultural  products,  exceeds  in  value,  by  a  hundred  per 
cent.,  the  whole  capital  employed  in  manufactures. 

AVERAGE  PEICES. 

Indian  corn,  at  50 -cents  per  bushel, $  193,640,092 

Hay,  at  #10  per  ton,      128,047,050 

Wheat,  at  $1  per  bushel, 91,642,957 

Oats,  at  50  cents  per  bushel, 65,000,000 

Cotton,  at  10  cents  per  pound,      57,800,000 

Potatoes,  at  25  cents  per  bushel, 28,250,000 

Tobacco,  at  10  cents  per  pound, 24,018,000 

Wool,  at  50  cents  per  pound, 17,900,000 

$606,298,099 

When  we  come  to  the  numbers  employed,  and  belonging  to  those 
employed,  in  each  pursuit,  after  making  proper  additions  for  persons 

25* 


294  TARIFF. 

in  families  not  enumerated  in  the  census  as  actively  engaged  in  each 
occupation,  it  will  be  found  that  those  in  agriculture  are  more  than 
twelve  millions,  or  above  three-fourths  of  the  whole ;  while  those  in 
manufactures  do  not  exceed  a  million  and  a  half,  or  one-eleventh  of 
the  whole.  Are  the  virtuous  yeomanry  of  the  country  and  their 
industrious  families  —  being  eight  to  one  of  the  inmates  of  factories  — 
to  be  overlooked  and  taxed  exorbitantly  to  sustain  the  latter ;  or,  rather, 
in  most  cases,  the  few  capitalists  who  employ  them  ?  Are  the  interest 
and  comfort  of  the  former  nothing,  compared  with  the  latter  1  Give 
cheerfully  to  the  latter,  as  I  do,  all  deserved  credit ;  but  are  the  former 
twelve  millions  of  human  beings  possessed  of  no  domestic  or  home 
industry  to  be  respected  ?  Is  not  their  labor  as  American  ?  their 
usefulness  as  great  ?  their  patriotism  and  worth  quite  as  proverbial  ? 

Yes,  sir,  you  not  only  try  to  collect  tribute  from  them  by  a  bill  like 
this,  while  you  in  many  cases  exonerate  the  manufacturers,  in  respect 
to  the  taxes  on  foreign  imports,  but  you  compel  them  to  pay  immense 
sums  more  for  various  domestic  manufactures  than  they  would  have  to 
pay  if  the  rate  of  duty  on  imports  were  not  higher  than  the  revenue 
standard.  Thus,  sir,  in  England  it  has  been  calculated  that,  in  con- 
sequence of  taxation  of  all  kinds, —  equalling  £50,000,000, —  the 
consumers  are  obliged  to  pay,  on  articles  not  imported,  £100.000,000 
more  than  they  would  otherwise  be  obliged  to  pay. 

Some  have  calculated  that  near  seventy  millions  of  dollars  were  paid 
here  yearly,  in  consequence  of  the  tax  on  foreign  articles  enhancing, 
to  a  like  extent,  the  price  of  similar  domestic  ones.  It  may  be  sug- 
gested that  the  manufacturers  pay  something  more,  also,  in  a  ratio  of 
their  numbers ;  yet  we  must  recollect  that  this  is  not  the  case  with 
them,  so  far  as  they  consume  their  own  fabrics;  and  that  they,  in 
other  particulars,  get  an  indemnity  in  the  higher  prices  of  what  they 
sell,  and  levy  it  unjustly  on  the  farmer  and  others,  who  obtain  no 
indemnity  from  any  quarter. 

On  the  sea-board  the  farmer  is  peculiarly  overburdened  by  this  sys- 
tem ;  because,  from  his  position  and  from  habit,  he  consumes  a  larger 
portion  of  foreign  imports  than  others ;  and,  so  far  from  being  himself 
protected,  even  in  the  home  market,  as  an  indemnity,  he  sees  Ohio 
tobacco  and  Indiana  pork  and  Illinois  flour  selling  near  his  own  door. 
This  would  be  right,  if  all  were  free  trade,  and  no  one  interest  spe- 
cially aided.  But,  when  the  manufacturer  in  Rhode  Island  becomes 
embarrassed,  he  resorts  to  Congress  for  a  higher  tariff  for  relief;  and, 
on  the  same  principle,  why  should  not  the  Mississippi  planter  or  New 
Hampshire  farmer  1  And  why  should  it  not  be  granted,  under  your 
system  of  partial  legislation,  in  one  case  as  well  as  the  other  ?  Some 
say,  however,  that  this  kind  of  tax,  if  oppressive,  is  voluntary,  and  can 
be  avoided  by  not  consuming  the  article.  This  argument  might  have 
some  force  where  only  luxuries  are  taxed ;  but  it  cannot  be  tolerated 
a  moment  where  almost  every  import  is  taxed  highly  which  custom 
and  taste  render  necessary,  even  to  the  middling  and  lower  classes, — 


TARIFF.  295 

indispensable  food  and  clothing,  no  less  than  comforts  and  ornaments, 

—  what  is  used  in  infancy,  manhood,  and  old  age;  needed  at  our 
births,  marriages,  and  deaths  ;  and  almost  as  vital  to  all  classes  as  air, 
fire,  and  water.  To  argue  that  it  is  voluntary  to  keep  or  relinquish 
the  use  of  such  articles,  is  to  call  it  voluntary  to  surrender  your  purse 
to  the  highwayman  when  the  alternative  is  your  life. 

How  would  the  manufacturers,  if  now  taxed  highly,  and  without 
any  protection,  be  pleased  with  a  similar,  though  juster  retort,  that  it 
was  voluntary  in  them  either  to  begin  or  to  continue  the  manufactur- 
ing branches  of  business,  if  not  profitable  ?  What  makes  these  high 
duties  more  burdensome  here  to  the  masses  is,  that  they  fall  on  both 
food  and  clothing ;  while  in  England,  for  instance,  they  fall  only  on 
the  former,  the  latter  being  cheap,  and  lightly  taxed. 

Again,  not  only  cottons  and  woollens  pay  there  a  low  rate  of  duty, 
but  iron.  And  the  great  condiment  of  all  food  for  most  of  the  animal 
creation,  and  the  necessary  of  all  classes,  there  and  elsewhere, — salt, 

—  while  proposed  to  be  taxed  here  eighty  per  cent.,  is  in  that  country, 
reproached  by  many  as  tax-ridden,  still  free,  nobly  free,  to  the  cot- 
tager as  well  as  the  peer. 

To  preach,  also,  as  some  do,  that  national  independence  requires  us 
to  proscribe  everything  foreign,  is  to  advocate  a  return  to  the  condition 
of  savages,  and  push  back  civilization  to  a  state  something  worse  than 
that  of  the  dark  ages.  While  I  abominate  as  much  as  any  one  foreign 
follies  and  luxuries,  and  foreign  political  dependence,  it  is  certain  that 
necessaries  and  comforts,  whether  obtained  at  home  or  abroad,  are  still 
necessaries  and  comforts ;  and  the  dependence  of  different  nations  on 
each  other  for  what  each,  by  climate,  skill,  or  custom,  can  produce 
cheapest,  is  a  source  of  pecuniary  gain  to  all,  and  quite  as  humanizing 
as  is  the  social  dependence  of  all  men  in  civilized  society  on  each  other 
for  many  mutual  aids,  and  often  becomes  the  strongest  pledge  of  con- 
tinued peace. 

But  some,  in  discussing  these  questions,  assert  that  this  view  of 
them  is  hostile  to  any  protection  whatever  to  manufactures ;  and  they 
ask  if  none  is  to  be  granted.  On  the  contrary,  I  contend  that  it  con- 
cedes much  protection, —  quite  as  great  as  our  fathers  looked  to  after 
the  Revolution,  and  during  the  first  quarter-century  of  the  present 
government.  It  recognizes,  first,  the  incidental  protection  which  agri- 
culture and  commerce  have  in  common  with  manufactures,  in  an  ocean 
of  one  to  three  thousand  miles  rolling  between  us  and  most  of  the 
places  where  foreign  articles  are  produced.  Next,  to  all  manufactures 
in  the  interior  there  is  a  further  protection,  by  the  additional  expense, 
risk,  &c,  of  carrying  thither  any  of  the  foreign  articles.  Similar  ones 
made  on  the  spot,  when  heavy,  like  lead,  iron,  salt,  and  hemp,  will 
often  command  the  whole  interior  market,  without  the  aid  of  any  duty 
whatever,  fiscal  or  protective,  on  the  foreign  article. 

But,  besides  these  two  important  protections,  there  is  the  natural 
protection  to  many  articles  resulting  from  climate  and  soil.     This  is 


296  TABIFF. 

quite  enough  to  make  them  flourish,  without  any  other.  Such  are  the 
granite,  hay,  ice,  and  potatoes,  of  the  north ;  the  wheat,  Indian  corn, 
pork,  and  tobacco,  of  the  Middle  States  or  the  west ;  and  the  cotton 
of  the  south.  These  need  no  aid  from  duties,  any  more  than  does  hemp 
or  timber  in  Russia,  coal  and  iron  in  England,  silks  and  wines  in 
France,  gold  and  silver  and  the  cochineal  in  Mexico,  drugs  in  Turkey, 
or  tea  in  China.  If  we  consult  nature,  as  we  should,  or  any  peculiar 
advantages  in  skill,  machinery,  or  capital,  we  shall  find  that  those 
pursuits  will  prove  most  profitable,  in  all  nations,  which  these  circum- 
stances indicate  to  be  congenial ;  and  if  we  attempt  to  force  what  is  not 
most  congenial  to  our  climate,  soil,  habits,  and  means,  the  pursuit  will 
often  prove  thriftless,  even  with  the  aid  of  high  protective  duties.  The 
growth  will  thus  often  be  an  unnatural  hot-bed  and  costly  product,  and 
the  system  as  unphilosophical  and  ridiculous  as  that  described  by  Swift 
in  Laputa,  of  extracting  sunbeams  for  heat  from  cucumbers. 

But  where  a  country  like  this,  with  a  large  capital,  and  liberal 
revenue  in  public  lands,  requires  also  some  moderate  addition  of  income 
from  taxes, —  and  they  are,  from  convenience,  imposed  on  imports, — 
a  further  protection  often  follows  incidentally  to  agriculture  and  com- 
merce, as  well  as  to  manufactures.  Nobody  regrets  such  a  protection 
when  an  incident,  and  when  proving  equally  favorable  to  each  of  those 
great  pursuits,  somewhat  in  the  ratio  of  the  numbers  and  capital 
employed  in  each.  That  alone  is  the  protection  by  the  General  Gov- 
ernment, with  its  limited  powers,  which  Jefferson  and  Madison  could 
legitimately  commend ;  and  never  the  unnatural  and  unjust  protection 
of  only  one  branch  of  industry,  to  the  neglect  or  expense  of  other 
branches.  Such  protection,  too,  becomes  constitutional,  not  as  an 
object  of  taxation, —  no  such  object  being  named  in  any  of  the  grants 
of  power, —  but  as  a  mere  accidental  consequence  of  taxation.  Early 
as  the  adoption  of  the  constitution,  Hamilton  said  that  "the  encour- 
agement of  agriculture  and  manufactures"  belonged  to  the  domestic 
police  of  the  States.  (No.  34,  Fed.)  One  of  the  incidents  of  war 
was  to  derange  commerce,  and  pet  manufactures  into  exclusive  favor ; 
and  then,  for  the  first  time,  protection  per  se,  and  for  them  alone,  was 
demanded ;  and  from  time  to  time  an  increase,  till  the  whole  system 
was  broken  down  by  its  excesses,  in  1833.  The  doctrine  and  practice 
which  have  prevailed  since,  till  now,  have  been  a  gradual  return  to  a 
system  of  duties  not  exceeding  twenty  per  cent.,  and  yielding  the  pro- 
tection which  would  flow  from  that  rate,  and  the  other  great  advan- 
tages resulting  often  from  position  and  climate.  There  may  we  stand 
now,  and  present,  against  any  excesses,  the  firm  front  of  principle, 
established  precedents,  and  sacred  compromises. 

Indeed,  Mr.  Clay  himself  declared,  as  late  as  June,  1840,  that  a 
duty  of  twenty  per  cent,  for  revenue,  aided  by  cash  duties  and  a  home 
valuation,  would  yield  a  sufficient  protection  to  all  kinds  of  manufac- 
tures that  ought  to  be  persisted  in.  That  apparent  change  in  views 
by  him  was  highly  commendable,  and  is  much  in  accordance  with  the 


TARIFF.  297 

change  which  has  been  going  on  in  England  since  Mr.  Huskisson's 
exertions  in  1825,  and  which  the  ablest  writers  in  political  science 
have  long  advocated ;  and  which,  at  last,  has  there  entered  the  work- 
shop, and  taken  possession  of  the  halls  of  legislation.  In  the  late 
examinations  before  the  committee  on  imports,  several  manufacturers 
are  said  to  have  disclaimed  all  wish  for  protection  above  what  would 
result  incidentally  from  distance  and  a  revenue  standard  of  twenty  per 
cent. ;  and  the  examples  of  Saxony,  as  well  as  Switzerland,  have 
demonstrated  the  truth  of  this,  by  years  of  manufacturing  prosperity, 
entirely  unprotected  by  special  legislation  or  high  duties. 

While  we  have  been  deliberating  here,  in  an  address  to  the  Ameri- 
can minister,  in  Manchester  itself, —  a  great  cotton  work-shop  for  the 
world, —  this  idea  is  expressed  boldly,  as  well  as  eloquently : 

"  We  trust  that  the  delusive  idea  of  protecting  one  branch  of  industry  by  inflicting 
injuries  upon  other  branches  is  fist  passing  away ;  and  that,  ere  long,  the  abundant 
products  of  your  country,  and  the  various  manufactures  of  ours,  will  be  freely  inter- 
changed ;  that  commercial  transactions  will  become  as  uncontrolled  by  fiscal  restric- 
tions as  are  the  waves,  which,  whilst  they  separate,  serve  to  unite  the  parent  with 
the  daughter  country.  We  feel  convinced  that  the  doom  of  monopoly  is  sealed  in  our 
land ;  that  even  the  blindness  of  party  is  becoming  enlightened ;  and  that  all  the 
wise  and  good  will  soon  be  brought  to  regret  that  a  single  hour  should  have  been 
allowed  to  pass  without  the  adoption  of  the  sound  principles  of  free  trade." 

England,  from  her  position,  small  territory,  dense  population,  and 
vast  mines,  must  chiefly  export  manufactures,  and  bring  back  agricul- 
tural products  ;  while  we,  from  our  position,  our  immense  territory, 
and  fertile  soil,  ought  chiefly  to  export  agricultural  products,  and  bring 
home  manufactures.  We  are  fitted  for  each  other's  opposite  wants, 
instead  of  running  in  parallel  lines  ;  and  if  partial  protection  be  at  all 
excusable  there  or  here,  it  is  there  for  manufactures  rather  than 
agriculture,  and  here  for  agriculture  rather  than  manufactures. 

Place,  then,  taxes  on  imports,  whenever  needed,  till  the  proper 
maximum  is  reached ;  and  let  all  the  great  interests  in  society,  includ- 
ing manufactures,  receive  in  this  way  all  the  additional  protection, 
beyond  their  remoteness  from  other  countries,  which  will  thus  fall  to 
their  lot,  —  but  there  halt.  That,  with  steadiness  in  legislation,  and 
natural  advantages,  is  enough ;  more,  without  them,  would  be  insuf- 
ficient. Such,  alone,  is  a  judicious  tariff,  whether  we  regard  reve- 
nue or  protection.  To  go  beyond  that,  for  aid  to  manufactures  alone, 
or  any  other  class,  is  not  only  without  constitutional  warrant,  but 
violates  the  first  principles  of  equal  and  just  legislation.  To  go 
beyond  that,  for  aid  to  all  equally,  by  imposing  higher  taxes  on  all, 
will,  of  course,  benefit  neither  in  particular,  and  thus  prove  useless  to 
all.  To  legislate  thus,  not  for  revenue,  but  the  advancement  of  par- 
ticular interests  in  particular  States,  is  to  assume  duties  which  belong 
to  those  States,  and  were  jealously  withheld  from  the  General  Govern- 
ment, and  will  prove,  as  they  have  heretofore,  constant  causes  of  par- 
tiality and  heart-burnings.    To  do  it  to  furnish  a  home  market,  in  place 


298  TARIFF. 

of  a  foreign  one,  is  to  pretend  that  one  market  is  better  than  many, 
and  that  a  sufficient  home  market  exists  for  a  hundred  millions  of 
spare  produce,  when  all  engaged  in  manufactures  cannot  consume  or 
want  two  millions  of  it.  To  do  it  for  aid  to  the  currency,  as  is  pre- 
tended, is  to  suppose  that  mere  barter  requires  more  specie  than  distant 
commerce :  and  that  what  deranges  the  issues  of  the  banks,  by  leading 
to  periodical  contraction  and  expansion,  is  conducive  either  to  the 
soundness  or  uniformity  of  the  circulating  medium. 

In  short,  to  do  this,  and  overload  with  unequal  burdens  different 
branches  of  enterprise  and  industry,  as  well  as  cripple  free  intercourse 
between  the  great  family  of  nations,  is  to  defeat  what  lies  at  the  true 
foundation  of  all  sound  policy  as  to  legislative  encouragement  to  busi- 
ness, which  is  to  aid  all  to  sell  wherever  they  can  get  most,  and  buy 
wherever  they  must  give  least. 

Without  going  into  many  other  fallacies  on  this  subject,  let  me  ask 
what  are  the  great  reasons  why  we  should  do  all  this  ?  Chiefly  to 
protect  one  class,  when  embarrassed,  to  the  neglect  or  cost  of  other 
classes  equally  embarrassed ;  chiefly  to  raise  a  few  more  pounds  of 
sugar,  where  not  more  than  one-third  of  the  cane  ripens,  compared 
with  Cuba ;  to  insure  the  manufacture  of  a  few  more  yards  of  calico, 
at  higher  cost,  like  the  making  of  ice  in  Louisiana,  or  the  growth  of 
pine-apples  on  the  White  Mountains ;  to  make  the  planters  of  the 
south  pay  five  cents  a  yard  more  for  their  cotton-bagging,  to  help 
Kentucky ;  to  force  the  whole  agricultural  and  navigating  interests  on 
the  Atlantic  to  pay  sixty  to  one  hundred  per  cent,  more  for  their  iron, 
to  benefit  the  wealthy  iron-masters  of  Pennsylvania. 

In  all  these  kinds  of  protection  to  manufactures  it  is  also  the  large 
capitalists  and  stockholders,  more  than  the  workmen,  who  profit  by 
high  duties.  And  if  you  possess  a  right  to  go  as  far  as  this  bill  does 
for  protection  alone,  it  would  certainly  prove  more  efficient  for  that 
object  to  go  further,  and,  as  in  the  ages  of  monopoly  in  England, 
march  up  to  the  prohibitory  duties ;  or,  as  in  France,  to  absolute  pro- 
hibition. That  would  also  be  undisguised;  and  the  people,  being 
obliged  in  that  case  to  furnish  most  of  the  revenue  in  some  other  form, 
would  see  more  clearly  for  whom,  why,  and  what  they  are  taxed,  and 
would  examine  more  critically  the  necessity  for  it. 

Our  commercial  and  navigating  interests  always  suffer  nearly  as 
much,  in  proportion,  as  agriculture,  by  high  duties  on  foreign  imports. 
Those  imports  being  the  returns  for  the  surplus  crops  of  the  farmer 
and  planter,  a  tax  on  the  returns  for  the  crops  when  coming  home 
injures  him,  and  the  country,  in  the  end,  as  much  as  a  tax  on  the 
crops  themselves  when  going  abroad.  So  a  tax  on  the  vessel  that  car- 
ries them,  included  in  her  iron,  copper,  cables,  and  cordage,  and  in 
what  is  eaten  and  worn  by  the  shipwright  who  makes  the  vessel,  the 
sailor  who  navigates  her,  and  the  merchant  who  owns  her,  is  an  evil  to 
the  farmer  likewise,  whose  expense  in  getting  his  products  to  a  final 


TARIFF. 


299 


market,  and  the  proceeds  back,  is  thus  vastly  enhanced.  In  this  view, 
their  connection  is  inseparable,  and  their  influence  reciprocal. 

Again :  as  agriculture  furnishes  the  chief  materials  for  our  foreign 
commerce,  everything  which  checks  and  discourages,  or  taxes  it, 
diminishes  the  employment  for  both  commerce  and  navigation.  These 
last  give  value  to  the  surplus  of  the  first.  These  last  do  not  make  us 
so  much,  or,  at  the  worst,  more  dependent  on  foreign  nations  than 
they  are  on  us.  What  we  obtain  from  them  with  the  products  of  our 
labor,  is  likewise  the  fruit  of  American  labor  and  American  industry, 
as  much  as  the  manufacture  of  soap  and  watches  here.  To  restrict 
our  markets, — to  lessen  our  freights,  by  extraordinary  taxation  on 
what  is  carried, — is  not  only  to  disuse  our  ships,  but  to  discourage 
production  at  home  for  export,  and  narrow  the  range  of  beneficial 
intercourse,  civilization,  and  Christianity. 

Our  whole  tonnage  for  foreign  trade  was  much  less  in  1830  than  in 
1837  and  1838,  partly  in  consequence  of  higher  duties  on  imports  and 
the  materials  of  ship-building ;  and,  whenever  the  tariff  was  lowered  on 
some  articles  in  1830,  and  on  all  in  1833,  that  description  of  tonnage, 
and  partly  from  that  circumstance,  increased  rapidly. 

In  a  like  manner,  our  exports  and  imports  both  fell  off,  or  increased 
slowest,  when  tariffs  were  highest,  and  increased  fastest  when  tariffs 
were  lowest.  The  latter  were  perfect  thermometers  to  the  former. 
Thus  stood  our 


IMPORTS  AND  CONSUMPTION  PER  HEAD. 


Imports. 


Uonsumptic 


BEFORE  A  HIGH   TARIFF. 

1792  to  1799  inclusive,  about  .   .    .   . 
Per  head  of  population,  yearly,  about 

1800  to  1807  inclusive 

Per  head,  near 


SINCE  A   HIGH   TARIFF. 


1824  to  1831 
Per  head 


UNDER   A   LOWER   TARIFF. 


1834  to  1841 

Per  head 


$  471, 000,000 

14.30 

817,000,000 

28.00 

678,000,000 
7.70 

1,114,000,000 
10.00 


$320,000,000 

10.00 

375,000,000 

8.70 

500,000,000 
5.60 

954,000,000 
8.00 


Exports,  domestic  increase  of,  when  the  duties  were  low,  — 1790  to 
1795,  —  increase  nearly 

Duty  increased,  and  other  taxes,  — 1795  to  1800,  —  lessened 

Tariff  modified,  and  other  taxes  lowered,  — 1800  to  1805,  — increased  . 

Commercial  restrictions,  — 1805  to  1810,  —  no  change,  by  increase  or 
diminution. 

War,  — 1810  to  1815, — increased  very  little 

Peace,  and  duty  not  high  the  last  three  years,  — 1815  to  1820, — 
increased 

Tariff  low,  except  the  last  year,  — 1820  to  1825,  —  increased 

Tariff  highest,  — 1825  to  1830,  —  lessened 

Tariff  lowered,  — 1830  to  1835,  —  increased 

Tariff  lower  still,  — 1835  to  1840,  —  increased  . 


$20,000,000 

9,000,000 

11,000,000 


3,000,000 

6,000,000 
15,000,000 

7,000,000 
41,000,000 
13,000,000 


The  increase  from  1820  to  1830,  under  the  highest  tariff,  was  only 


300  TARIFF. 

about  eight  millions ;  but  from  1830  to  1840,  under  a  low  tariff,  the 
increase  exceeded  fifty-four  millions.  Indeed,  such  has  been  the 
impulse  imparted  to  these  under  the  low  tariff  of  the  last  eight  or  ten 
years,  that  we  have  now  become  the  second  commercial  power  in  the 
world.  So  far  from  returning  to  the  Chinese  prohibitory  system,  and 
abandoning  all,  or  most,  foreign  trade, — or  imitating  the  highest  pro- 
tective country  in  Europe,  which,  by  such  a  policy,  has  made  the 
grass  grow  in  the  streets  of  Spain,  and  stripped  it  of  commerce  and  a 
navy,  and  sunk  it  from  a  first  to  a  third  rate  power  in  Christendom, — 
is  it  not  far  better  to  push  onward  those  high  destinies  which  nature, 
habit,  and  position,  have  long  indicated  are  to  be  the  results  of  our 
agriculture  and  commerce  ?  —  a  territory  extensive  and  fertile  beyond 
imagination,  to  feed  an  increasing  population,  and  furnish  ample 
exports  for  ages ;  and  a  length  of  sea-coast,  rivers,  and  lakes,  which 
give  us  seamen,  vessels,  enterprise,  and  employment,  if  not  overtaxed, 
sufficient,  in  a  few  more  unshackled  years,  to  make  us  first  on  every 
ocean,  and  foremost  on  the  globe,  with  means  for  naval  defence  and 
naval  glory. 

Rather  than  check  this  spirit  by  discouragements  such  as  are 
directly  introduced  in  this  bill,  taxing,  for  the  first  time  in  many  years, 
the  sheathing-copper  for  our  ships,  raising  higher  than  even  in  1828 
the  duties  on  cordage,  restricting  the  period  of  drawback,  and  imposing 
a  new  transit  duty  on  what  is  reexported,  and  then  attempting  to  pre- 
vent our  country  from  becoming  like  "Venice,  Genoa,  and  Holland, 
formerly  the  depots  for  all  nations,  and  giving  thus  so  much  additional 
employment  to  our  vessels, — rather  than  travel  back  and  shut  our- 
selves up  in  our  terrapin  shells,  —  let  us  pause. 

How  can  our  ship-building  and  navigation  be  expected  to  compete 
with  the  English  and  German,  if  pressed  down  with  these  new  dis- 
criminations against  it  ?  with  larger  taxes  also  on  all  it  works  up  and 
all  its  workmen  consume,  and  a  shortened  period  for  reexportation, 
and  a  new  direct  tax  on  this  kind  of  carrying  trade  of  two  and  a  half 
per  cent.?  No,  sir.  The  opposite  course  will  make  us  what  we  have 
ever  gloried  to  be, — the  friends  of  true  freedom  in  everything  com- 
mendable. Our  example  as  to  this  in  politics,  and  in  our  constitution 
as  to  religion  and  the  press,  will  be  tarnished,  if  we  hesitate  to  carry 
it  out  also  in  our  fiscal  and  commercial  policy. 

Of  what  use  is  equal  freedom  in  elections,  if  we  are  not  to  have 
equal  freedom  in  taxes,  equal  freedom  in  protection,  equal  freedom  in 
trade  ?  This  asks  no  exemption  from  equal  taxes  and  equal  burdens 
of  all  kinds.  But  every  high  restrictive  duty  on  imports,  as  well  as 
every  additional  duty  on  the  materials  used  in  ship-building,  or  con- 
sumed by  its  workmen  and  navigators,  is  not  only  a  discouragement  to 
commerce,  but,  if  exclusive,  tends  to  make  its  interests  tributary  to 
manufactures,  and  paralyzes  our  exertions  to  become  the  principal 
carriers  for  the  world.  The  ancient  noble  spirit  in  our  statesmen,  by 
which  that  ambition  was  promoted,  in  struggling  to  establish  the  doc- 


TARIFF.  301 

trine  that  free  ships  make  free  goods, — and  even  in  waging  war 
on  the  most  powerful  nation  of  the  globe  for  free  trade  and  sailors' 
rights,  and  afterwards  offering  reciprocal  treaties  of  commerce  to  all 
mankind, — was  worthy  of  the  proudest  days  of  the  best  republics  in 
any  age.  It  was  open,  confident,  manly ;  and  has  helped  to  cover  our 
country  with  substantial  wealth,  and  unprecedented  improvements. 

Let  us  not,  then,  retrograde,  and  pass  such  a  partial,  restrictive, 
and  anti-commercial  bill  as  this,  and  disable  ourselves  forever  from 
standing  forth  as  the  champions  of  the  free  trade  principle.  Let  us 
not  check,  in  any  way,  the  expansion  of  that  commerce  which  has 
proved  to  our  country  not  only  so  enriching,  but  so  civilizing ;  and 
which,  by  our  private  enterprise,  as  well  as  our  public  expeditions,  is 
making  us  discoverers  of  new  islands,  if  not  continents,  and  the 
pioneers  in  establishing  more, — the  reign  of  peace,  the  arts,  and  reli- 
gion, in  many  of  the  remotest  isles  of  the  Pacific. 

A  harsh  course  to  this  commerce  will  not  only  drive  our  vessels 
from  the  ocean,  and  blight  the  inducements  to  agricultural  enterprise, 
but  it  will  aim  a  fatal  blow  at  the  best  foundations  of  all  our  national 
defences  and  national  independence. 

Our  army  will  then  lose  half  its  energies  and  muscle,  as  it  will  be 
manned  by  starving  and  feeble  manufacturers,  driven,  in  the  revul- 
sions to  which  their  pursuits  are  exposed,  to  enlist,  or  find  refuge  in 
the  almshouse.  Our  navy  will  be  crippled  and  dismantled;  for,  with- 
out a  commercial  marine,  there  can  be  no  navy ;  and,  with  a  palsied 
commerce,  our  ships  of  war  will  have  to  be  manned  by  the  same 
enfeebled  artisans,  rather  than  the  healthy  bodies,  strong  arms,  and 
lion  hearts,  who  have  spent  their  youth  on  the  mountain  wave,  or 
breathed  the  pure  atmosphere  of  hills  and  valleys. 

Considerations  like  these  show  that,  if  there  is  to  be  any  partial  or 
high  protection  for  particular  pursuits,  it  should  be  in  favor  of  agricul- 
ture and  commerce,  and  against  manufactures,  rather  than  the  reverse. 
Those  engaged  in  agriculture,  too,  always  have  the  means  to  live, 
when  their  surplus  will  not  serve  at  home  or  abroad ;  but  manufactur- 
ers, in  such  revulsions,  cannot  eat  their  cloths  or  iron,  and  must 
usually  fly  for  existence  to  the  parish  poor-house,  and  be  fed  on  the 
grain  and  meat  of  the  unprotected  and  unfavored  farmer. 

The  next  step  will  be  one  equally  inconsistent  with  our  true 
national  character  and  policy,  but  in  strict  accordance  with  this  bill, — 
that  is,  to  impose  high  duties  on  foreign  laborers,  as  well  as  foreign 
merchandise.  What,  sir !  we,  whose  Revolutionary  victories  were  won, 
in  part,  by  foreigners, — by  the  Lafayettes,  the  Paul  Joneses,  the 
Kosciuskos,  and  Steubens, — now  prate  about  our  being  inundated  by 
the  cheap  laborers,  as  well  as  the  cheap  labor,  of  Ireland,  Germany, 
and  England !  We,  whose  forests  have  been  felled,  whose  canals  dug, 
and  railroads  laid, — whose  bridges,  and  forts,  and  public  buildings  (of 
which  we  are  so  boastful),  erected  by  workmen  from  abroad, — will  next 
seek  to  exclude  from  our  shores  this  very  foreign  laborer ! 
26 


302  TARIFF. 

Where  this  anti-liberal  and  anti-commercial  spirit  may  end, — 
whether  in  some  debased  bondage  to  castes  and  classes,  like  Egypt  and 
India,  or  in  some  military  despotism,  to  quell  those  who  dare,  like  our 
brethren  in  one  of  the  Eastern  States,  try  to  be  free  (free  in  equal 
rights  and  privileges),  and  not  submitting  to  unequal  or  oppressive 
taxation  of  one  class  or  section,  to  benefit  others, —  remains  to  be  seen. 
But,  however  all  the  rest  may  end,  I  hope,  ere  long,  to  see  salt  and 
books  placed  in  the  free  list :  the  first,  cliiefly  to  lighten  the  burdens 
of  agriculture,  though  a  relief  to  all  the  consuming  classes ;  and  the 
last,  to  accelerate  the  improvement  of  our  whole  people,  in  more  easily 
becoming  acquainted  with  the  arts,  their  social  duties,  and  political 
rights,  as  well  as  in  procuring  less  expensively  enjoyments  which  are 
virtuous,  elevating,  and  useful.  If  we  will  not  encourage  making  trade 
free,  nor  the  food  of  the  body  free,  let  us  put  forth  one  effort  for  the 
glory  of  making  the  food  of  the  mind  free.^ 


TARIFF.f 


As  one  of  the  committee  that  reported  this  resolution,  I  was  against 
it,  and  have  heard  nothing  since  to  reconcile  me  to  its  adoption.  I 
am  for  action  now  on  the  modification  of  the  present  high  tariff,  and 
for  the  prompt  passage  of  the  bill  introduced  by  the  senator  from 
South  Carolina  (Mr.  McDuffie),  amended  as  it  may  and  should 
be,  in  some  respects,  if  the  motion  to  postpone  does  not  prevail,  so  as 
to  mould  it  into  a  form  more  acceptable  to  most  of  the  great  interests 
and  great  sections  of  the  country.  My  object  is  to  present  some  rea- 
sons why  the  exorbitant  and  partial  rate  of  duties  on  imports  which 
now  exists  should  not  be  tolerated  a  single  day  longer  than  is  required 
to  make  the  change  judiciously. 

I  shall  speak  to  the  merits  of  this  proposition  solely.  I  intend  to 
treat  it  as  a  practical  question, — one  vital  to  twenty  millions  of  people, 
rather  than  an  abstract  theory,  or  affecting  the  welfare  merely  of  small 
regions  and  small  classes. 

We  have  been  asked  to  rely  on  facts  rather  than  speculations.  Such 
a  course  was  proper  ;  and  as,  in  every  controversy,  a  variety  of  facts 

*For  Tables  referred  to  in  this  speech,  see  Appendix,  A,  B,  C,  D. 
t  A  speech  on  the  resolution  to  postpone  indefinitely  Mr.  McDuffie' s  bill  to  reduce 
the  tariff ;  delivered  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  Feb.  7th  and  8th,  1844. 


TARIFF.  303 

is  involved,  appearing  often  different  to  different  persons,  equally  hon- 
est, but  not  equally  inquiring,  or  connected  with  the  transactions,  my 
great  effort  will  be  to  throw  new  light  on  the  facts  which  bear  upon 
the  subject.  Settle  some  of  the  doubtful  facts,  sir,  and  there  will  be 
much  less  difficulty  as  to  principles ;  for,  while  men  and  events  change, 
principles  are  eternal.  Looking,  then,  to  all  the  real  circumstances 
connected  with  the  present  high  and  unequal  tariff,  whether  it  be  a 
measure  for  protection  or  revenue,  and  the  following  facts  seem  to 
require  its  amendment  without  delay. 

In  the  first  place,  it  could  not  have  become  a  law,  except  as  a  tem- 
porary measure,  in  a  great  exigency.  It  was  voted  for  by  no  one  as 
a  new  experiment,  which  might  require  years  of  experience  in  order 
to  develop  the  propriety  of  its  continuance  or  modification.  The  sys- 
tem involved  in  it  had  been  previously  tried  for  near  a  generation,  and 
found  wanting.  It  had  been  in  operation  till  its  impolicy  and  oppres- 
sions convulsed  the  Union  from  its  centre  to  its  extremities.  It  had 
been  deliberately  abolished  by  a  union  of  its  former  friends  and  foes  ; 
and,  so  far  from  its  having  now  become  sacred,  forbidding  any  agita- 
tion of  its  character,  and  requiring  us  to  wait  longer  for  further  devel- 
opments of  its  good  or  evil,  the  speeches  of  several  gentlemen  on  its 
passage  prove  it  was  intended  to  be  amended  at  an  early  day.  It 
passed  here  by  a  majority  of  only  one  ;  and,  in  order  that  the  Senate 
may  see  that  no  mistake  exists  in  imputing  such  opinions  to  some 
without  whose  votes  here  the  bill  must  have  failed,  I  will  trouble  the 
Senate  by  reading  to  them  an  extract  or  two  from  the  debates  on  that 
occasion.  The  distinguished  senator  from  New  York  (Mr.  Wright) 
declared  that  it  was  bad,  and  loaded  with  defects.  (Appendix  to 
Globe,  953  p.,  for  1842.)  But  the  only  choice  ivas  between  this 
measure  and  none  at  all  (955  p.)  ;  and  he  felt  obliged  to  act  under 
"  the  disagreeable  alternative  of  a  very  bad  bill,  and  no  revenue 
and  no  collection  laws."  Another  member  (Mr.  Williams),  then 
the  colleague  of  the  chairman  (Mr.  Evans),  who  deprecates  touching 
the  present  tariff,  and  eulogizes  its  provisions  so  highly,  voted  for  it 
under  the  deliberate  expression  that  the  bill,  as  a  whole,  is  highly 
objectionable  (957  p.)  ;  that  he  would  not  hesitate  to  vote  against  it, 
if  any  other  provision  could  be  made ;  but  he  supported  it  to  "enable 
government  to  continue  its  operation,  until  the  people  shall  have 
another  opportunity  of  selecting  agents  to  represent  them  in  another 
Congress ;  and  whatever  is  wrong  in  the  provisions  of  this  bill  {and 
there  is  much  of  it)  may  then  be  corrected." 

The  senator  from  Pennsylvania  (Mr.  Buchanan)  also  had  the  can- 
dor to  declare  the  bill  to  be  objectionable.  But  the  choice  was,  in  his 
view,  between  that  or  none,  and  financial  disgrace.  "I  shall 
accept  (said  he)  this  now,  as  much  the  least  of  two  evils,  and  look 
forward  with  hope  to  better  times  for  an  adjustment  of  the  tariff  on 
a  scale  more  consonant  with  all  the  great  and  various  interests  of  the 
Union,  without  sections."     (951  p.) 


304  TARIFF. 

The  President  also  (without  whose  signature  the  bill  would  not 
have  become  a  law)  contemplates,  in  his  message,  that  a  revision  of  it 
maj  now  be  proper. 

But,  sir,  there  is  a  higher  authority  than  all  these,  with  gentlemen 
opposite,  in  favor  of  examining  into  the  provisions  of  the  existing  tariff, 
and  correcting  any  of  them,  if  erroneous.  Mr.  Clay,  in  a  letter  written 
last  September,  says,  concerning  the  tariff  of  1842  : 

"  If  there  be  any  excesses  or  defects  in  it  (of  which  I  have  not  the 
means  of  judging),  they  ought  to  be  corrected."  But  as  to  the  tariff 
of  1828,  he  was  well  acquainted  with  u  the  circumstances  tvhich 
gave  birth"  to  that.  "They  are  highly  discreditable  to  American 
legislation;"  and  that  was  a  "high  tariff"  "  eminently  deserving 
that  denomination."  Now,  those  well  acquainted  with  the  act  of  1842 
know  it  to  be  not  only  as  high  a  tariff,  in  many  respects,  as  that  of 
1828,  but  in  some  higher ;  and  if  the  former  was,  on  that  account, 
discreditable  to  American  legislation,  this  is  worse,  and,  therefore, 
should  be  at  once  corrected.  Other  circumstances  connected  with  it 
were  similar.  It  originated  in  importunities  from  only  one  small  class 
in  society ;  was  partial  and  unequal  in  its  burdens  for  their  benefits, 
and  tended  to  exact  tribute  from  the  rest  to  sustain  them  alone.  Did 
any  gentleman,  who  had  not  examined  the  details  critically,  deem  this 
a  mere  opinion  founded  on  loose  generalities,  and  consider  it  impossi- 
ble that,  after  the  fatal  effects  which  flowed  from  the  high  tariff  of 
1828,  a  majority  of  any  Congress  could  proceed  to  renew  several 
duties  quite  as  high,  and  indeed  much  higher?  Let  him,  then,  look 
to  the  recorded  facts  in  our  own  statute-books,  from  which  a  tabular 
statement  has  been  compiled  by  me,  a  few  items  in  which  I  will  take 
the  liberty  to  read.     (See  Table  No.  1.)* 

Here  are  eighteen  distinct  articles,  each  of  which,  save  one,  is  higher 
under  the  present  tariff  than  left  by  that  of  1828,  and  Other  acts 
passed  soon  after.  Among  them  are  the  important  items  of  cordage, 
cotton  cloths,!  cotton  bagging,  some  kinds  of  glass,  iron,  shoes  and 
boots,  with  molasses,  crockery- ware,  and  woollens.  If  salt  and  sugar 
were  at  a  specific  rate  of  duty  nominally  less,  they  were  burdened 
higher  in  proportion  to  their  present  value.  Many  of  these  articles 
were  great  necessaries  of  life,  whether  in  the  log-cabin  or  palace,  or 
on  the  vessel's  deck  freighted  with  the  rich  spices  and  silks  of  India, 
or  the  western  keel-boat  and  gallant  steamer  loaded  with  the  labors 
of  the  hardy  farmer  across  the  Alleghanies  :  and  when  cordage  is  now 
taxed  four  and  a  half  cents,  instead  of  four,  per  pound ;  steel,  two 
dollars  and  fifty  cents,  instead  of  two  dollars,  a  hundred ;  shoes,  thirty, 
instead  of  twenty-five  cents,  a  pair  ;  and  crockery- ware  fifty  per  cent. 

*  Appendix,  E. 

t  In  a  subsequent  part  of  Mr.  "Woodbury's  speech,  he  referred  to  one  case  where 
printed  cottons,  under  the  act  of  1842,  paid  a  hundred  per  cent,  more  than  they  did 
under  the  high  rates  of  1823  and  1824.  Mr.  Simmons  expressed  a  wish  to  learn  how 
Mr.  Woodbury  made  this  out ;  and  he  replied,  giving  the  details. 


TARIFF.  305 

more  than  the  former  impost,  —  can  any  one  say,  that,  if  the  act  of 
1828  was  high  or  discreditable,  or  a  bill  of  abominations,  this  is  not 
higher,  and  more  discreditable  ? 

I  will  not  go  through  all  the  articles  where  the  parallel  is  drawn 
before  me  in  the  table,  lest  it  might  prove  tedious.  But  there  were 
weighty  reasons,  beside  these,  for  an  early  revision  of  the  present  tariff. 
In  its  general  character  and  design,  it  was  framed,  not  for  revenue, 
but  protection  ;  and  that  protection  direct,  and  chiefly  to  one  class  of 
the  community,  which  being  a  small  one,  in  proportion  to  the  whole, 
it  thus  endangered,  if  not  sacrificed,  the  interests  of  the  many,  to  aid 
a  few.  Whenever  any  of  its  provisions  have  been  moulded  differently 
to  accomplish  this  purpose,  it  is  a  departure  from  sound  principle ; 
being  a  purpose  not  financial  in  its  origin  or  tendency,  not  in  con- 
formity with  the  sound  principles  of  taxation,  nor  permissible  for  other 
objects  under  the  spirit  of  our  confederated  form  of  government,  where 
no  such  power  is  expressly  granted,  and  every  power  not  so  granted  is 
reserved  to  the  States  and  the  people. 

I  shall  not,  however,  on  this  occasion,  investigate  the  mooted  ques- 
tion of  its  constitutionality,  because  time  for  such  an  argument  does 
not  exist,  without  omitting  much  that  tends  to  demonstrate  the  pro- 
priety of  amending  such  a  bill,  on  great  principles  of  justice  and 
equality  in  legislation  older  than  all  constitutions,  and  paramount  to 
every  technical  consideration. 

I  proceed  to  offer  facts  to  prove  that  the  present  tariff  is  such  a  bill. 
It  was  prayed  for,  in  many  respects,  by  only  one  class  of  the  commu- 
nity —  manufacturers.  Testimony  was  taken  only  as  to  the  influence 
of  many  of  its  provisions  to  aid  one  class.  The  passage  of  them,  in 
their  present  form,  was  advocated  as  necessary  for  the  protection  of 
that  class ;  and,  however  some  other  considerations  as  to  revenue,  or 
consequential  benefits  to  other  classes,  may  have  mingled  with  the 
paramount  object  in  giving  the  present  extraordinary  form  and  press- 
ure to  most  of  the  rates  of  duty,  yet  the  interest  and  protection  of 
manufactures  were  the  Alpha  and  Omega  in  the  numerous  depart- 
ures which  occur  in  it  from  the  sound  revenue  system  which  existed 
here  from  the  foundation  of  the  government,  until  the  derangements 
of  industry  during  the  last  war.  Prior  to  that  event  (as  I  will  explain 
more  fully  hereafter),  the  highest  range  of  duties  on  foreign  imports 
had  never  swollen  above  fifteen  per  cent.,  with  two  and  a  half  more 
for  a  time,  on  account  of  the  Mediterranean  fund,  to  raise  means  for 
humbling  the  piratical  powers  on  the  coast  of  Barbary.  Those  were 
truly  revenue  and  not  protective  taxes,  except  that  incidental  protec- 
tion to  all  classes  which  always  results  to  all  branches  of  protective 
industry  from  any  impost,  however  small,  on  rival  imports  from 
abroad.  But  the  double  duties  for  revenue  during  the  war,  with  the 
increased  difficulty  in  obtaining  supplies  from  other  countries,  had 
given  a  new  impulse  to  several  domestic  manufactures ;  and  when 
peace  arrived,  those  engaged  in  them  deprecated  the  injury  likely  to 
26* 


306  TARIFF. 

flow  from  the  large  import  and  consumption  of  foreign  articles  similar 
to  their  own.  Accordingly,  to  protect  them,  and  them  alone,  and  that 
but  temporarily,  the  addition  of  near  forty-two  per  cent,  was  made  to 
several  of  the  duties,  as  before  graduated,  on  the  peace  standard  for 
revenue :  and,  so  far  from  its  being  pretended  that  this  addition,  delib- 
erately placed  on  rival  productions  only,  was  solely  with  a  view  to 
revenue,  it  was  admitted  and  proposed  to  be  done  directly  for  the  pur- 
pose of  protection,  and  that  chiefly  to  the  manufacturing  interests 
alone.  Before  me  is  Mr.  Dallas'  report,  in  February,  1816,  form- 
ally declaring  that  such  protection  was  desirable,  and  selecting  the 
articles  which  most  needed  it,  and  recommending  the  amounts  of  duty 
on  each  which  he  considered  likely  to  yield  it.  (See  3  State  papers 
—  Finance,  p.  9.) 

What  class,  after  six  years'  trial,  became  dissatisfied  with  this 
amount  of  direct  protection,  and  asked  for  and  obtained  more  in 
1824  ?     Who  again  in  1828  ?  and  who  again  in  1842  1 

There  is  no  pretence  that  the  further  increase  of  duty  in  1824  and 
1828,  on  the  former  protected  articles,  was  demanded  or  imposed  for 
the  purposes  of  revenue.  One  of  the  supporters  of  the  bill  of  1828, 
now  a  member  of  this  body  (Mr.  Wright),  frankly  admitted,  in 
July,  1842,  "that  the  tariff  of  1828  was  avowedly  passed  for  pro- 
tection ;  and  if  considerations  of  revenue  had  any  connection  with 
it,  they  ivere  only  incide?ital  to  the  main  object  of  protection" 
(Appendix  to  Globe,  p.  653,  for  1842.) 

As  little  can  it  be  pretended  that  similar  provisions,  asked  by  sim- 
ilar persons  and  for  similar  objects,  in  1842,  were  not  cast  into  their 
present  unequal,  high,  and  oppressive  form,  for  the  same  objects  as 
before, —  the  direct  protection  of  the  single  class  of  manufacturers.  I 
admit  that  we  needed  more  revenue  in  1842.  But  it  is  manifest  that 
we  could  easily  have  obtained  as  much  as  now  from  a  duty  on  foreign 
imports  not  averaging  over  twenty  or  twenty-five  per  cent. ;  or,  if 
obliged  to  go  higher  in  any  case,  under  the  impression,  usually  erro- 
neous, that  by  going  higher  a  larger  aggregate  amount  can  be  obtained, 
it  is  equally  manifest  that  we  ought  to  have  gone  higher  on  luxuries, 
rather  than  necessaries ;  and  on  such  articles  as  would  throw  the  tax, 
according  to  the  ability  to  pay,  on  property,  rather  than  the  person,  and 
not  make  taxation  doubly  odious  and  oppressive,  as  is  done  by  this  tariff, 
through  its  operation  almost  as  a  poll-tax,  making  the  poor  pay  per 
capita  nearly  as  much  to  the  support  of  the  General  Government  as  the 
wealthy.  Such  oppressive  provisions  were,  therefore,  not  designed  for 
fair  fiscal  purposes,  but  for  protection  to  a  favorite  class,  possessed  of 
great  enterprise  and  political  influence,  I  admit,  and  equal  rights  with 
others  ;  but  no  more  moral,  useful,  or  patriotic,  than  most  other  classes 
of  the  American  people,  and  having  a  very  small  proportion  of  num- 
bers and  capital  to  be  protected,  compared  with  the  whole  Union.  As 
the  mere  revenue  standard,  in  some  countries,  has  not  exceeded  ten 
per  cent.,  and  in  others  fifteen  or  twenty, —  and  we  did  not  exceed  the 


TARIFF.  307 

latter  during  near  a  quarter  of  a  century, —  I  propose  to  show,  by 
figures,  that  the  present  duties  are,  in  many  vital  respects,  far  above 
that  standard.  I  hold  in  my  hand  a  statement  of  the  rate  now 
imposed  on  several  articles  above  not  only  twenty  but  thirty  per  cent. 
And  I  am  the  more  anxious  that  the  Senate  should  note  the  numerous 
and  great  excesses  into  which  the  act  runs,  from  the  circumstance  that 
some  deny  the  high  protective  character  of  any  part  of  the  present 
tariff;  and  many,  who  doubt  it,  are  unable  to  verify  their  apprehen- 
sions with  accuracy,  because,  most  of  the  duties  being  specific,  and  the 
cost  of  the  articles  abroad  not  known,  the  real  percentage  of  the  tax 
on  their  value  is  concealed,  and  not  able  to  be  ascertained,  except  at 
the  treasury. 

But,  fortunately,  in  1840,  a  document  was  obtained  from  the  treasury 
department,  which  gave  the  cost  and  charges  and  quantities  of  all  import- 
ant articles  imported  in  that  year.  Thus  everybody  can  reduce  the  spe- 
cific rate  to  one  ad  valorem  for  that  year  ;  and  are  since  enabled  to  do 
the  same,  where  the  cost  of  the  article  has  not  materially  changed. 
In  order,  however,  to  verify  my  own  computations,  and  correct  any 
changes  in  value  since,  I  have  compared  my  statement  with  one  which 
has  been  obtained  officially  from  the  treasury  department,  and  it  is  in 
this  way  rendered  as  accurate  as  is  possible  in  the  nature  of  things. 
(See  Table  No.  2.)* 

What,  Mr.  President,  do  you  believe  has  been  the  general  result  ? 
Only  four  or  five,  or,  at  most,  a  dozen  articles  on  which  the  commu- 
nity are  taxed  over  the  highest  revenue  standard  of  thirty  per  cent.  ? 
No,  sir ;  but  forty-one  articles, —  and  that  without  including  seven- 
teen varieties  of  iron  manufacture,  and  as  many  more  of  cotton. 
These  forty-one  also  include  most,  if  not  all,  of  those  great  necessaries 
of  life  which  we  import ;  and  among  them  seven  which  are  so  bur- 
dened as  to  pay  over  fourteen  and  a  half  millions  of  dollars,  out  of 
twenty-one  that  would  accrue  on  imports  no  larger  than  those  of  1840. 
(See  Table  No.  3.)f 

Does  the  Senate  suppose,  however,  that  the  duty  imposed  in  these 
cases  merely  crossed  the  true  line  of  revenue  a  few  cents  or  fractions, 
and  therefore  not  enough  to  change  the  leading  features  of  a  revenue 
bill  ?  If  so,  they  must  be  surprised  to  learn  that  some  descriptions 
of  them  reach  fifty,  eighty,  one  hundred,  and  even  one  hundred  and 
fifty  per  cent.  Thus,  boots  and  shoes  pay  from  fifty  to  seventy-five 
per  cent. 

What  was  the  duty,  also,  on  coal,  used  largely  on  the  sea-board  by 
all  classes,  and  especially  in  the  freezing  inclemencies  of  weather  now 
agonizing  the  poor  and  distressed  of  our  cities  ?  Quite  sixty-one  per 
cent,  (by  the  official  computation  of  the  department),  or  more  than 
double  the  highest  true  revenue  rate.  The  duties  on  cordage  —  an 
article  of  universal  use,  in  some  form  or  other,  from  the  St.  Croix  to 
the  Sabine,  and  even  to  Oregon  —  ranged  from  seventy-one  to  one 

*  Appendix,  F.  +  Appendix,  G. 


308  TARIFF. 

hundred  and  eighty-eight  per  cent.  Cottons,  which,  more  or  less, 
helped  to  clothe  all  classes,  paid  from  forty  to  sixty-three  per  cent. 
Woollens  rose  still  higher.  Sugar,  which  sweetens  the  cup  of  all, 
swelled  to  seventy-one  and  one  hundred  and  one  per  cent.  Salt, 
which  was  gloriously  free  in  that  country  so  often  sneered  at  by  us  as 
deeply  oppressed,  paid,  by  this  tariff,  near  eighty  per  cent.,  and  some 
kinds  still  more ;  while  iron,  one  of  the  great  instruments  to  vanquish 
the  earth,  as  well  as  our  enemies,  and  carry  on  our  whole  domestic  and 
foreign  commerce,  is  from  forty-five  to  seventy-seven  per  cent.  Indeed, 
the  hammer  and  the  anvil  of  every  blacksmith's  shop  in  every  village 
of  the  Union  are  loaded  with  some  of  the  highest  of  these  duties ;  and 
the  oppression  from  them,  in  a  thousand  other  forms,  is  carried  into 
every  kitchen  and  farm-yard  of  the  whole  republic. 

Again  :  if  this  tariff  was  not  intended  for  direct  protection  to  man- 
ufacturers rather  than  for  revenue,  why  were  not  its  highest  duties 
and  greatest  collections  from  luxuries  and  the  elegances  of  life,  rather 
than  necessaries?  This  is  the  course  elsewhere.  In  England,  for 
instance,  tobacco  is  made  to  yield  near  seventeen  millions  of  revenue 
yearly,  and  spirits  about  thirteen  millions  by  customs,  and  near 
twenty-five  millions  more  by  excise, —  sums  ranging  not  far  from  our 
whole  income  on  imports.  But  we  burden  highest  the  prime  necessa- 
ries of  life,  and  collect  from  sugar,  iron,  woollens,  cottons,  linens, 
molasses,  and  silks, —  most  of  them  indispensable  in  every  cottage  and 
every  degree  of  latitude  and  longitude  over  our  wide  domain, —  the 
great  mass  of  our  whole  revenue  on  foreign  merchandise. 

Here  is  a  detailed  statement,  computed  on  the  latest  data  accessible, 
and  showing  that  those  articles  alone  probably  pay  more  than  three- 
fourths  of  the  whole.  (See  Table  No.  3.)*  I  challenge  any  plausible 
reason  to  be  assigned  for  this  odious  and  oppressive  discrimination, 
except  that  every  one  of  these  articles  has  rival  productions  here  of  a 
manufactured  character,  intended  thus  to  be  directly  protected. 

Should  a  doubt  remain  that  the  present  tariff  was  modelled  to  accom- 
plish that  favorite  object  to  manufacturers,  and  not  to  aid  at  the  same 
time,  by  like  and  equal  protection,  the  interests  of  agriculture,  manu- 
factures, and  commerce  (which  is  frequently  pretended),  let  us  consider 
for  a  moment  a  fact  or  two  more,  which  alone  are  sufficient  to  silence 
forever  any  such  pretence. 

What,  sir  !  Tell  the  hard-fisted  farmer  that  he  is  equally  watched 
over  and  protected  by  the  bill,  when  almost  every  production,  agricul- 
tural and  otherwise,  which  is  the  raw  material  for  a  manufacture  here, 
is  unprotected  — exonerated  from  any  but  a  small  duty,  or  made  entirely 
free  ;  and  when,  at  the  same  moment,  the  manufacture  from  that  pro- 
duction is  protected  highly,  and  often  oppressively,  at  the  expense  of 
the  farmer  who  is  obliged  to  purchase  it  ?  That  the  Senate  may  see 
that  this  offensive  discrimination  is  not  accidental,  or  confined  to  two  or 
three  cases  only,  and  that  it  is  not  a  tariff  of  equal  protection  to  all,  I 

*  Appendix,  G. 


TARIFF.  309 

have  prepared  a  schedule  from  the  acts  of  Congress  themselves,  now 
before  me,  from  which  it  appears  that,  in  fifteen  instances  at  least,  and 
as  to  some  very  leading  articles,  the  imports  of  three  of  which  alone 
exceed,  yearly,  four  millions  of  dollars,  the  producer  of  the  raw  article 
has  the  protection  of  only  one,  five,  and  fifteen  per  cent,  generally, 
while  in  every  instance  the  manufacturer  working  up  the  raw  article 
has  a  protection  ranging  from  twenty-five  to  one  hundred  and  thirty 
per  cent.     (See  Table  No.  4.)* 

Thus,  while  the  farmer  gets  the  protection  of  only  nine  per  cent,  on 
his  raw  flax,  the  manufacturer  of  it  into  cloth  obtains  on  that  from 
twenty-five  to  fifty  per  cent.  And  while  rough  wood  gets  the  aid  of 
but  twenty  per  cent.,  those  who  make  manufactures  from  it  have 
thirty ;  and  while  cheap  wool  was  long  free,  and  now  has  but  five  per 
cent,  protection,  the  farmer  is  obliged  to  go  and  pay  for  protection  to 
the  manufacturer,  making  carpets  and  cloths  for  him  from  the  same 
wool,  sixty  per  cent.  He  was  assisted  as  to  his  hides  (of  which  almost 
every  agriculturist  raised  some)  but  five  per  cent.,  while  the  manufac- 
ture of  leather  from  them,  which  the  firmer  was  compelled  to  buy 
for  his  family,  received  thirty-five  per  cent,  protection. 
[Some  senators  here  smiled,  and  said,  Not  his  own  hide.] 
No,  sir ;  as  to  that,  he  has  been  skinned  so  often,  and  so  patiently, 
the  high  protectionists  seem  to  imagine  that,  like  the  boy's  eels,  he  will 
continue  to  bear  it  without  complaint,  because  he  is  so  used  to  it.  No, 
sir;  they  are  the  hides  of  the  herds  that  graze  on  his  verdant  pas- 
tures which  are  thus  discriminated  against ;  —  and,  though  the  hemp 
which  may  grow  in  the  fields  contiguous  in  Maine  and  Vermont,  as 
well  as  in  Kentucky  and  Missouri,  is  better  protected,  and  so  high  as  to 
burden  much  the  ship-builder,  yet  the  manufacturers  using  up  that 
very  hemp  obtain  for  their  cordage  and  cotton  bagging  over  a  hun- 
dred, and,  in  some  cases,  over  two  hundred  per  cent.,  more  than  the 
rate  on  the  raw  material.  Again :  the  maker  of  brass  kettles,  an  arti- 
cle so  widely  used,  obtains  from  every  purchaser  the  benefit  of  a  duty 
of  twelve  cents  a  pound,  while  the  raw  material  is  imported  free.  The 
boasted  protection  to  the  silk-grower  is  of  the  same  character,  when,  in 
household  economy,  the  aged  and  young  may  economically  raise 
cocoons  and  receive  fifty  cents  a  pound  as  a  protective  duty  ;  but  are 
obliged  to  pay  the  manufacturer  on  the  very  article  made  from  those 
cocoons,  and  bought  for  their  own  wear,  a  protective  duty  of  five  times 
that  amount,  or  two  dollars  and  fifty  cents.  The  specifications  might 
be  much  further  extended,  did  time  permit;  but  the  table  itself  is  at  the 
service  of  any  gentleman  who  wishes  to  see  all  the  cases,  and  there  is 
annexed  an  enormous  list  of  articles  admitted  entirely  free,  for  the  benefit 
of  the  manufacturer.  (See  Table  No.  4.)*  What  has  been  the  way 
in  which  the  farmer  was  deluded  to  overlook  this  system  of  direct  par- 
tiality against  him  and  his  great  interests  1  It  has  been  by  keeping  these 
unjust  discriminations  in  the  back-ground,  and  pushing  forward  cases 

*  Appendix,  H. 


310  TAKIFF. 

of  agricultural  productions  on  which  the  duty  was  high,  but  which,  as 
the  chairman  (Mr.  Evans)  admitted,  were  articles  so  abundant  here 
that  they  needed  no  protective  duties, — no,  sir  !  no  more  than  the  ice 
and  granite  of  New  Hampshire.  Hence,  when  the  producer  of  the 
raw  material  here  (as  in  the  former  cases)  finds  it  more  difficult  to 
grow  and  compete  with  the  producer  abroad,  he  receives  less  aid,  or 
none ;  but  when  he  can  easily  and  abundantly  grow  an  article,  and 
compete  with  a  whole  world,  without  artificial  protection,  the  friends 
of  the  American  system  offer  to  him  very  high  duties.  They  sternly 
withhold  what  he  wants,  but  kindly  bestow  what  he  does  not  want. 
It  is  a  curious  circumstance,  also,  that  the  agricultural  articles  favored 
with  a  higher  duty  are  all  those  from  which  little  or  nothing  is  man- 
ufactured here ;  and  hence  the  friends  of  the  American  system  have 
no  interest  against  their  being  high.  Nor  are  the  duties,  in  this  last 
class  of  cases,  made  high  for  revenue,  any  more  than  for  real  and 
needed  protection  ;  because  the  aggregate  imports  of  the  whole  eleven 
articles  were,  in  1840,  but  $71,547,  yielding  a  revenue  of  not  over 
one-third  that  sum,  while  the  aggregate  imports  of  only  three  of  the 
fifteen  other  articles  noty  protected  fully  or  equally  were  fifty-seven 
times  larger  than  all  of  these.  The  tendency,  then,  if  not  the  object,  of 
the  duties  which  are  high  on  agricultural  products,  is  mere  show,  or 
visionary.  It  has  been  to  throw  dust  in  the  eyes  of  the  community  on 
this  subject,  and  sustain  one  of  the  delusions  which  has  misled  so  many 
farmers  into  the  erroneous  belief  that  their  interests  were,  in  reality, 
protected  as  much  as  those  of  the  manufacturers.  In  order  that  sena- 
tors may  see  the  particulars  on  which  my  remarks  to  this  last  point 
are  grounded,  here  is  a  schedule  of  these  articles,  the  duty  on  each, 
and  the  whole  imports  of  them  in  1840, —  some  reaching  only  the  pal- 
try sum  of  seven  dollars,  and  some  nothing.  (Table  No.  5.)*  Now, 
sir,  if,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  I  have  proved  this  bill  to  be  shaped  on  a  sys- 
tem of  high  discriminating  duties  for  the  direct  protection  of  manufac- 
turers, rather  than  all  classes,  and,  in  many  respects,  for  that,  and  not 
for  revenue,  it  follows,  even  if  it  be  within  the  purview  of  any  tech- 
nical words  used  in  the  great  charter  of  our  liberties,  that  it  is  hostile 
to  the  spirit  and  the  compromises  which  created,  and  which  alone  can 
sustain,  that  charter ;  hostile  to  the  equal  interests  and  claims  of  great 
sections,  classes,  and  industrial  pursuits  ;  hostile  to  the  true  welfare  of 
the  majority  of  the  whole,  as  a  whole ;  and  hostile  to  their  harmony 
and  peace,  as  well  as  the  perpetuity  of  the  Union  itself. 

I  am  aware  that  the  preamble  of  the  act  of  1790  has  been  cited  as 
an  evidence  that  the  direct  encouragement  of  manufactures  was  one  of 
the  objects  of  that  act.  But  when  the  rate  of  duties  contained  in  it 
is  adverted  to  (a  skeleton  of  which  he  held  in  his  hand  —  Table  No. 
8),  fit  would  be  seen  that  none  of  them  was  higher  than  a  moderate 
revenue  standard.  Most  of  them  did  not  exceed  five  and  ten  per 
cent.,  and  consequently  nothing  could  have  been  intended  by  them 

♦Appendix,  I.  t  Appendix,  J. 


TARIFF.  311 

beyond  that  incidental  encouragement  to  manufactures  which  all  rev- 
enue tariffs  must  yield,  when  founded  on  pure  revenue  principles.  Our 
fathers  concluded  to  encourage  manufactures,  by  collecting  a  large 
portion  of  their  revenue  from  imports,  rather  than  deriving  it  all  from 
direct  taxes  and  internal  duties.  Indeed,  their  rule,  like  mine,  was  to 
collect,  if  needed,  all  the  revenue  from  imports,  which  will  yield,  with- 
out going  higher  in  the  rates  than  a  revenue  standard,  and  what  is 
consistent  with  the  preservation,  in  full  vigor,  of  our  foreign  com- 
merce. But  all  wanted  beyond  that  should  be  obtained  from  other 
sources ;  and,  happily,  our  lands  will  usually,  with  that,  yield  sufficient 
for  all  the  expenses  of  an  economical  government  in  time  of  peace.  It 
is  not  inconsistent  with  free  trade  that  the  imports  help,  in  a  due  pro- 
portion with  other  property,  to  pay  the  public  expenses. 

But  when,  in  1794,  and  1798,  and  1812,  our  fathers  needed  more 
revenue  than  could  be  obtained  from  moderate  duties,  —  no  higher 
than  a  revenue  standard,  —  they  resorted  for  the  rest  to  taxes  on  land 
and  excise.  Their  actions  spoke  louder  than  any  words,  especially  when 
the  latter  are  open  to  misconstruction,  and  they  never  deemed  it 
proper,  under  the  spirit  of  the  constitution,  to  encourage  manufactures 
by  express  prohibitions  of  foreign  articles,  or  by  implied  prohibitions, 
through  exorbitant  imposts  of  a  prohibitory  tendency.  On  the  con- 
trary, in  all  the  pressure  of  a  heavy  Revolutionary  debt,  the  large 
expenses  of  a  quasi  war  with  France,  and  our  controversies  with  the 
Barbary  powers,  as  well  as  our  Indian  border  foes,  they  never,  as  a 
general  rule,  though  needing  more  revenue,  increased  the  rates  of  duty 
beyond  fifteen  per  cent.,  or  seventeen  and  a  half,  including  the  Mediter- 
ranean fund.  Here  is  the  evidence  of  the  fact  (See  Table  No.  6),*  and 
it  is  conclusive  proof  that  no  such  restrictive  system  for  manufactures, 
like  the  act  of  1842,  was  ever  deemed  within  the  true  spirit  and  policy 
of  the  government.  It  is  not  a  little  curious,  that,  when  annoyed  by 
foreign  prohibitory  imposts,  and  with  their  own  tonnage  also  compara- 
tively small,  neither  Mr.  Jefferson,  in  his  able  report,  in  1794,  on  our 
foreign  commerce,  nor  Mr.  Madison,  in  his  celebrated  resolutions 
founded  thereon,  ever  proposed  any  higher  duties  than  ten  or  fifteen 
per  cent.,  except  a.s  a  mere  war  measure  of  retaliation;  and  that  never, 
in  fact,  till  war  itself  came,  in  1812,  with  all  its  burdens  and  horrors, 
and  the  American  protective  system  followed  in  1816,  —  aggravated 
again  till  it  became,  in  1828,  little,  if  any,  less  burdensome  and  terrific 
than  war  itself,  —  did  any  of  the  Revolutionary  school  of  statesmen 
think  proper  to  impose  duties  higher  than  fair  revenue  ones,  or  which 
tended,  except  incidentally,  to  protect  any  one  branch  of  national 
industry,  at  the  expense  of  the  rest.  It  is  still  more  curious,  that  even 
Hamilton — so  much  relied  on  by  the  manufacturers  as  an  advocate  of 
their  system  —  argues  strongly  in  the  Federalist  (p.  204)  that  the 
power  given  in  the  constitution  to  collect  taxes  from  other  sources 
than  imports  was  meant  to  prevent  such  high  duties  on  imports  alone 

*  Appendix,  J. 


312  TAKIFF. 

as  would  yield  direct  encouragement  to  manufactures,  and  injure  com- 
merce and  agriculture,  as  well  as  revenue,  and  was  with  a  view  to 
enable  Congress,  rather  than  do  that,  to  keep  the  duties  at  a  revenue 
standard,  and  resort  for  additional  means,  if  needed,  to  taxes  of  a  dif- 
ferent character.     His  words  are  these : 

"  Suppose,  as  has  been  contended  for,  the  federal  power  of  taxation  -were  to  be  con- 
fined to  the  duties  on  imports  ;  it  is  evident  that  the  government,  for  want  of  being 
able  to  command  other  resources,  would  frequently  be  tempted  to  extend  these  duties 
to  an  injurious  excess.  There  are  persons  who  imagine  that  this  can  never  be  the 
case  ;  since  the  higher  they  are,  the  more  it  is  alleged  they  will  tend  to  discourage  an 
extravagant  consumption,  to  produce  a  favorable  balance  of  trade,  and  to  promote 
domestic  manufactures.  But  all  extremes  are  pernicious  in  various  ways.  Exor- 
bitant duties  on  imported  articles  serve  to  beget  a  general  spirit  of  smuggling,  which 
is  always  prejudicial  to  the  fair  trader,  and  eventually  to  the  revenue  itself ;  they 
tend  to  render  other  classes  of  the  community  tributary,  in  an  improper  degree,  to  the 
manufacturing  classes,  to  whom  they  give  a  premature  monopoly  of  the  markets  ; 
they  sometimes  force  industry  out  of  its  most  natural  channels  into  others  in  which  it 
flows  with  less  advantages  ;  and,  in  the  last  place,  they  oppress  the  merchant,  &c. 
&c."  —  Federalist,  p.  204. 

This  is  noble  and  manly  reasoning, — considering  it  comes  from  one 
so  often  quoted  as  favoring  the  American  system,  —  and  is  worthy  to 
be  written  in  letters  of  gold  for  the  perusal  of  all  its  indiscreet  friends. 

Again :  who  of  his  school,  who  then  ever  dared  to  propose  absolute 
prohibitions  of  foreign  rival  commodities,  as  is  done  in  the  absolute 
governments  of  Europe,  and  under  the  powers  of  the  English  and 
French  governments,  so  much  more  unlimited  than  ours?  Yet  what  is 
the  difference  in  principle  —  in  political  substance  and  in  morals  — 
between  a  direct  prohibition  and  one  incidental  by  prohibitory  duties  1 

And  now,  when  old  reasons  for  retaliation  have  mostly  become 
obsolete,  —  the  reasons  of  infancy  in  the  growth  of  manufactures, 
so  as  to  need  direct  aid,  ceased, — we  are  driven  into  a  prohibitory 
system  more  ultra  than  was  ever  before  attempted  in  the  worst  times. 
Is  this  anomaly  opposed  now,  or  was  it,  in  practice,  opposed  before 
1816,  because  the  friends  of  free  trade  then  or  now  resist  protection? 
No.  They  favor  protection  to  the  persons  and  property  of  all ;  that 
is,  equal  protection — equal  justice.  But  what  has  astonished  me  most 
is,  that  in  this  debate,  as  well  as  elsewhere,  attempts  have  been  made 
to  make  the  restrictive  system  lean  on  Franklin's  staff  for  support; 
when,  from  early  life,  I  had  always  supposed  that  the  opinions  of 
Eranklin  on  free  trade  were  decidedly  of  the  Colbert  and  Adam  Smith 
school ;  and  that,  so  far  from  the  free  trade  notions  having  originated, 
since  his  day,  here,  and  being  likely,  in  the  views  of  the  chairman 
(Mr.  Evans),  not  to  survive  their  authors,  I  thought  they  had  lived 
already  much  beyond  their  authors  abroad ;  and,  as  becoming  better 
understood,  were  making  converts  on  both  continents,  among  the  ablest 
minds,  as  well  as  the  great  masses  of  society.  In  order  to  see  how 
the  real  truth  was  on  this  controverted  point  concerning  Franklin,  and 
the  conclusions  to  which  his  great  experience  and  unrivalled  sagacity 


TARIFF.  313 

had  reached  on  this  subject,  I  have  taken  some  pains  to  run  through 
portions  of  his  works,  and  without  giving  much  that  is  pertinent,  will 
trouble  the  Senate  with  a  few  extracts  from  them. 
In  volume  6,  page  157,  he  says  : 

"  We  see  much  in  parliamentary  proceedings,  and  in  papers  and  pamphlets,  of  the 
injury  the  concessions  to  Ireland  will  do  to  the  manufacturers  of  England,  Avhile  the 
people  of  England  seem  to  be  forgotten,  as  if  quite  out  of  the  question.  If  the  Irish 
can  manufacture  cottons,  and  stuffs,  and  silks,  and  linens,  and  cutlery,  and  toys, 
and  books,  &c  &c.  &c,  so  as  to  sell  them  cheaper  in  England  than  the  manufac- 
turers of  England  sell  them,  is  not  this  good  for  the  people  of  England  who  are  not 
manufacturers  ?  And  will  not  even  the  manufacturers  themselves  share  the  benefit  ? 
Since,  if  cottons  are  cheaper,  all  the  other  manufacturers  who  wear  cottons  will  save 
in  that  article  ;  and  so  with  the  rest." 

Page  533 : 

"  I  am  not  enough  master  of  the  course  of  our  commerce  to  give  an  opinion  on  this 
particular  question,  and  it  does  not  behoove  me  to  do  it ;  yet  I  have  seen  so  much 
embarrassment  and  so  little  advantage  in  all  the  restraining  and  compulsive  systems, 
that  I  feel  myself  strongly  inclined  to  believe  that  a  State  which  leaves  all  her  ports 
open  to  all  the  world  upon  equal  terms  will,  by  that  means,  have  foreign  commodi- 
ties cheaper,  and  sell  its  own  productions  dearer,  and  be  on  the  whole  most  pros- 
perous." 

Volume  IV.,  page  170  : 

"  Perhaps,  in  general,  it  would  be  better  if  government  meddled  no  further  with 
trade  than  to  protect  it,  and  let  it  take  its  course.  Most  of  the  statutes,  or  acts, 
edicts,  arrets,  and  placarts  of  parliament,  princes,  and  States,  for  regulating,  directing, 
or  restraining  of  trade,  have,  we  think,  been  either  political  blunders  or  jobs  obtained 
by  artful  men  for  private  advantage,  under  pretence  of  public  good.  When  Colbert 
assembled  some  wise  old  merchants  of  France,  and  desired  their  advice  and  opinion 
how  he  could  best  serve  and  promote  commerce,  their  answer,  after  consultation,  was 
in  three  words  only  — '  Laissez  nous  fair e,' — Let  us  alone.  It  is  said  by  a  very 
solid  writer  of  the  same  edition,  that  he  is  well  advanced  in  the  science  of  politics  who 
knows  the  full  force  of  that  maxim, '  Pas  trop  gouvernor ,' —  not  to  govern  too  much; 
Vhich,  perhaps,  would  be  of  more  use,  when  applied  to  trade,  than  in  any  other  pub- 
lic concern.  It  were  therefore  to  be  wished  that  commerce  was  as  free  between  all 
nations  of  the  world  as  it  is  between  the  several  counties  of  England ;  so  would  all,  by 
mutual  communication,  obtain  more  enjoyments." 

As  to  this  article  just  quoted,  Mr.  Whately  drew  up  most  of  it,  and 
Franklin  revised  and  approved  it,  and  it  is  published  in  his  works. 
Again,  in  an  essay  entirely  his  own  (vol.  v.,  p.  417  and  418),  he 

says  : 

"  Several  of  the  princes  of  Europe  have  of  late,  from  an  opinion  of  advantage  to 
arise  by  producing  all  commodities  and  manufactures  within  their  own  dominions,  so 
as  to  diminish  or  render  useless  their  importations,  endeavored  to  entice  workmen 
from  other  countries,  by  high  salaries,  privileges,  &c.  Many  persons,  pretending  to 
be  skilled  in  various  great  manufactures,  imagining  that  America  must  be  in  want  of; 
them,  and  that  the  Congress  would  probably  be  disposed  to  imitate  the  princes  above 
mentioned,  have  proposed  to  go  over  on  condition  of  having  their  passage  paid,  lands 
given,  salaries  appointed,  exclusive  privileges  for  terms  of  years,  &c.  Such  persons, 
on  reading  the  articles  of  confederation,  will  find  that  the  Congress  have  no  power 
committed  to  them,  nor  money  put  into  their  hands,  for  such  purposes;  and  that,  if 
any  such  encouragement  is  given,  it  must  be  by  the  government  of  some  separate 
State.     This,  however,  has  rarely  been  done  in  America;  and  when  it  has  been  done, 

27 


314  TARIFF. 

it  has  rarely  succeeded  so  as  to  establish  a  manufacture  which  the  country  was  not  so 
ripe  for  as  to  encourage  private  persons  to  set  it  up,  —  labor  being  generally  too  dear 
there,  and  hands  difficult  to  be  kept  together,  every  one  desiring  to  be  a  master,  and  the 
cheapness  of  land  inclining  many  to  leave  trades  for  agriculture.  Some,  indeed,  have 
met  with  success,  and  are  carried  on  to  advantage;  but  they  are  generally  such  as 
require  only  a  few  hands,  or  wherein  great  part  of  the  work  is  performed  by  machines. 
Goods  that  are  bulky,  and  of  so  small  value  as  not  well  to  bear  the  expense  of  freight, 
may  often  be  made  cheaper  in  the  country  than  they  can  be  imported ;  and  the  man- 
ufacture of  such  goods  will  be  profitable  wherever  there  is  sufficient  demand.  The 
farmers  in  America  produce,  indeed,  a  good  deal  of  wool  and  flax;  and  none  is 
exported,  —  it  is  all  worked  up;  but  it  is  in  the  way  of  domestic  manufacture.  The 
buying  up  quantities  of  wool  and  flax,  with  the  design  to  employ  spinners,  weavers, 
&c,  and  form  great  establishments,  producing  quantities  of  linen  and  woollen  goods 
for  sale,  has  been  several  times  attempted  in  different  provinces ;  but  those  projects 
have  generally  failed,  goods  of  equal  value  being  imported  cheaper.  And  when  the 
governments  have  been  solicited  to  support  such  schemes  by  encouragements  in 
money,  or  by  imposing  duties  on  importation  of  such  goods,  it  has  been  generally 
refused,  on  this  principle,  —  that  if  the  country  is  ripe  for  the  manufacture,  it  may  be 
carried  on  by  private  persons  to  advantage ;  and  if  not,  it  is  a  folly  to  think  of  forcing 
nature. 

"  Great  establishments  of  manufacture  require  great  numbers  of  poor  to  do  the 
work  for  small  wages  ;  those  poor  are  to  be  found  in  Europe,  but  will  not  be  found  in 
America  till  the  lands  are  all  taken  up  and  cultivated,  and  the  excess  of  people  who 
cannot  get  land  want  employment  The  manufacture  of  silk,  they  say,  is  as  natural 
in  France  as  that  of  cloth  in  England,  because  each  country  produces  in  plenty  the 
first  material ;  but  if  England  will  have  a  manufacture  of  silk  as  well  as  that  of  cloth, 
and  France  of  cloth  as  well  as  that  of  silk,  these  unnatural  operations  must  be  sup- 
ported by  mutual  prohibitions,  or  high  duties  on  the  importation  of  each  other's 
goods ;  by  which  means  the  workmen  are  enabled  to  tax  the  home  consumer  by 
greater  prices,  while  the  higher  wages  they  receive  makes  them  neither  happier  nor 
richer,  since  they  only  drink  more  and  work  less.  Therefore  the  governments  in 
America  do  nothing  to  encourage  such  projects." 

But  enough  of  this  to  remove  doubts  in  the  most  incredulous.  Hav- 
ing shown  that  the  present  tariff  was  framed  for  the  real  protection  of 
only  one  class,  and  that  this  was  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  the  consti- 
tution, and  every  principle  of  equal  justice  in  taxation  or  protection,  as 
well  as  contrary  to  the  whole  practice  of  the  government  for  the  firsf 
quarter-century  of  its  existence,  and  when  resorted  to  since  had  cre- 
ated intense  excitement  and  wide  dissatisfaction,  till,  after  a  few  years, 
the  Union  became  convulsed,  and  the  system  was  abandoned, —  I  will 
next  ask  a  few  moments'  attention  to  its  character  as  a  system,  not  for 
protection,  but  for  raising  revenue. 

The  senator  from  Maine  seemed  to  consider  it  a  good  bill  as  a  revenue 
act. 

[Mr.  Evans  observed  that,  in  answering  the  senator  from  South 
Carolina  (who  maintained  that  the  act  of  1842  was  destructive  to 
revenue),  he  had  shown  it  increased  revenue,  but  did  not  say  it  was 
exclusively  an  act  for  revenue.] 

Very  well,  sir ;  I  am  happy  to  hear  the  gentleman  admit  that  he  does 
not  defend  the  tariff  as  exclusively  an  act  for  revenue.  This  vir- 
tually concedes  my  former  position,  that  it  is,  in  many  respects,  a 
measure  for  protection.  It  is  one  of  the  peculiarities  of  this  measure, 
that  among  manufacturers  it  is  justified  as  an  act  for  their  protection, 
but  in  quarters  averse  to  the  protective  system  it  is  vindicated  as  a 


TARIFF.  315 

mere  revenue  measure,  and  in  a  mixed  audience  it  is  defended  as 
being  intended  for  both  —  a  little  for  each.  If  the  argument  anywhere 
presses  hardest  against  its  protective  features,  then  it  is  insisted  that 
no  change  shall  be  made,  as  it  is  excellent  for  revenue ;  and  if  hard- 
est against  its  revenue  character,  then  it  is  said  to  do  so  much  good  for 
protection,  it  must  not  be  amended,  or  even  discussed;  and  if  it  is 
unable  to  stand  alone  on  either  hypothesis,  then  the  argument  has 
been,  as  from  the  chairman  (Mr.  Evans),  that  whatever  inequality, 
injustice,  imperfection,  or  wrong  of  any  kind,  is  connected  with  it,  is 
made  reparation  for  by  the  aid  it  gives  in  reducing  prices ■,  furnish- 
ing home  markets,  employing  more  American  industry  and  less 
foreign  pauper  labor  ;  and,  in  various  ways,  more  than  remunerating 
the  country,  as  a  whole,  for  any  evils  it  may  happen  to  inflict  on  some 
of  its  parts. 

Now,  sir,  let  us  test  these  matters  on  facts,  and  not  broad  asser- 
tions. Is  it  good  as  a  revenue  measure?  and,  if  not,  what  is  the 
extent  of  the  evils  it  inflicts,  whether  as  a  protective  or  financial  sys- 
tem 1  and  are  those  evils  compensated  by  any  of  the  benefits  that  have 
resulted,  or  are  likely  to  flow  from  it,  if  we  forbear  to  amend  it  ? 

Several  remarks  have  already  been  made  indicating  my  views  as  to 
Some  of  its  objectionable  features  as  a  bill  for  raising  revenue.  What 
are  the  true  elements  and  features  of  a  mere  revenue  bill  1  In  the 
first  place,  the  leading  object  of  a  revenue  bill  is  to  obtain  revenue 
equally ;  of  this,  unequally.  A  tax  should  be  made  to  bear  lightly  as 
possible  on  consumers ;  this  is  to  bear  most  heavily  on  them.  The 
particular  duties  in  numerous  instances  range  ten,  twenty,  and  even 
forty  and  fifty  per  cent,  higher  than  the  common  revenue  standard. 
I  do  not  pretend  that,  like  the  dew-point  or  freezing-point,  the  finan- 
cial scale  can  be  mathematically  marked,  beyond  which  no  duties 
should  rise,  on  any  occasion  or  under  any  circumstances.  But  I  do 
insist  that  few  nations,  ancient  or  modern,  have  ever  deemed  it  proper, 
for  revenue,  to  exceed  twenty  or  twenty-five  per  cent.  The  accus- 
tomed rate  for  that  purpose  has  oftener  (as  here,  from  1790  to  1812) 
been  under  twenty  than  above  it ;  and  when  exceeding  it,  as  sometimes 
in  England,  France,  and  Spain,  and  here  since  1816,  has  usually  been 
done  avowedly  for  purposes  of  protection,  and  not  revenue.  It  is 
now,  in  Prussia  and  Germany,  no  less  than  Switzerland,  seldom  as 
high  as  twenty  per  cent.  Hence  the  compromise  act  of  1833  pro- 
vided for  a  gradual  reduction  of  our  protective  duties  to  revenue  ones, 
and  fixed  them  at  a  maximum  of  twenty  per  cent.  And  hence  both 
General  Harrison  and  Mr.  Clay,  in  addresses  before  the  election  of 
1840,  expressed  their  satisfaction  with  the  compromise,  limiting 
imposts  to  that  rate ;  because  that  rate  not  only  would  be  likely  to 
furnish  revenue  enough,  with  the  public  lands,  for  an  economical 
administration  of  the  government,  but,  coupled  as  it  was  with  cash 
duties  and  a  home  valuation,  would  incidentally  afford  a  large  and 
equal  protection,  against  foreigners,  to  all  the  producing  classes,  and 


316  TARIFF. 

an  ample  one  for  any  business  which  it  would  be  profitable  for  the 
country,  in  its  present  position,  to  have  prosecuted  here. 

Do  any  infer  from  this  that  I  oppose  the  collection,  in  a  proper 
way,  of  revenue  enough,  in  time  of  peace,  to  prevent  running  in  debt 
(as  we  lately  have  done)  twenty-seven  millions  ?  or,  however  anxious 
to  relieve  labor  and  the  necessaries  of  life,  to  defray  all  honest  debts 
rather  than  resort  to  an  odious  evasion  by  repudiation  ?  or  to  sustain 
in  due  vigor  all  the  useful  establishments  of  the  country,  with  public 
credit,  public  faith,  and  public  honor  ?  Far,  far  from  it.  But  collect 
it  on  revenue  principles,  and  in  a  true  revenue  way. 

In  the  next  place,  the  present  tariff  is  bad  as  a  revenue  measure,  by 
attempting  to  collect  more  from  the  owners  and  consumers  of  foreign 
imports  than  an  equal  or  proportionate  burden  on  that  kind  of  prop- 
erty. Being  often  sixty  to  one  hundred  per  cent,  in  particular  cases, 
and  thirty-seven  per  cent,  on  an  average,  it  is  much  higher  than  taxes 
on  other  property  in  society,  looking  either  to  value  or  income.  And, 
though,  under  our  double  systems  of  government,  I  do  not  contend  that 
all  the  revenue  for  the  General  Government  may  not  be  collected 
from  imports,  if  it  does  not  put  them  above  twenty  or  twenty-five  per 
cent., —  leaving  lands  and  other  property  to  be  taxed  by  the  States, — 
yet  imports  should  pay  only  a  fair  proportion.  It  is  another  objection- 
to  this  bill,  as  a  fiscal  one,  that  if  we  are  to  receive  under  it  all  the 
revenue  its  friends  anticipate,  we  shall  collect  a  larger  proportion  of 
the  monied  taxes  of  the  whole  country  from  customs  than  it  is  usual 
to  collect  in  most  other  governments.  In  France,  only  about  thirty 
millions  of  dollars  (or  one-eighth  of  their  whole  income)  is  collected 
from  customs, — over  one  hundred  and  eighty  millions  being  from 
other  sources, — while  in  England,  little  over  a  third  of  the  whole 
taxes  come  from  customs,  and,  including  tithes  and  the  poor  rates, 
probably  not  one-third.  But  here,  at  least  half  of  the  whole  would  be 
derived  from  customs,  as  all  our  monied  taxes  in  the  States  are  not 
computed  to  average  over  one  dollar  per  head,  or  eighteen  to  twenty 
millions  of  dollars  in  the  aggregate.  If  you  will,  then,  push  our 
national  expenses  so  high  as  not  to  be  able  to  get  sufficient  revenue  at 
a  rate  of  twenty  or  twenty-five  per  cent.,  I  say  it  is  sound  political 
economy  to  go  for  the  rest  to  the  other  sources  of  revenue  which  the 
constitution  has  conferred,  and  for  that  very  purpose,  and  to  act,  in 
this  respect,  as  our  fathers  were  wont  to  do  in  1794, 1798,  and  1812. 

But  other  and  paramount  objections  to  the  present  tariff  are,  that  it 
taxes  articles  of  trade  so  high  as  to  tend  to  break  up  trade  itself;  that 
it  taxes  necessaries  higher  than  luxuries, — as  before  explained,  that 
it  taxes  the  person  in  its  operation,  rather  than  property  or  ability 
to  pay ;  and,  in  many  cases,  by  one  specific  duty,  collects  from  the 
consumer,  in  middling  or  indigent  circumstances,  as  large  a  tax  on  a 
coarser  and  cheaper  fabric — such  as  shoes,  flannels,  etc.,  worn  by 
them — as  on  a  finer  and  more  costly  one  of  the  same  name,  worn  by 
the  rich.     The  only  effectual  mode   of  preventing  partiality  and 


TARIFF.  317 

oppression  in  such  bills  is  to  fix  a  liberal  maximum  of  twenty  or 
twenty-five  per  cent.  Within  that,  the  duty  may  well  fluctuate,  rather 
than  be  rigidly  horizontal,  if  revenue  objects  require  and  admit  it ;  so 
as  to  relieve  necessaries  some,  if  practicable,  and  favor  the  needy 
rather  than  wealthy,  and  graduate  most,  if  not  all,  duties  on  a  scale 
ad  valorem, —  so  that  the  people  can  know  the  true  extent  of  their 
burdens,  and  each  pay  only  in  proportion  to  the  value  of  what  he 
consumes. 

To  illustrate  the  tendency  of  varying  the  amount  of  duty  on  par- 
ticular articles  beyond  a  certain  ordinary  and  settled  standard  for 
mere  revenue,  and  on  revenue  principles,  do  not  gentlemen  see,  that 
if  you  can  depart  from  that,  and  go  far  above  it,  for  protection  to  one 
class  (such  as  the  manufacturers)  at  the  expense  of  others  (the 
farmers),  you  may,  as  in  England,  by  the  odious  corn-laws,  depart 
from  it  for  the  benefit  of  the  land-owners,  and  at  the  expense  of  the 
manufacturers  1 

If  such  enormous  high  duties  as  disfigure  the  present  tariff  can  be 
imposed  on  particular  articles  even  for  revenue,  much  less  protection, 
do  not  all  see  that  a  door  is  also  opened  to  equal  if  not  greater  injus- 
tice another  way  ?  Cannot  a  few  articles  be  thus  selected  for  revenue, 
and  others  left  free,  or  at  a  low  rate,  where  the  articles  selected  are 
consumed  chiefly  but  in  one  section  of  the  country,  or  by  one  class  of 
the  community ;  and  when  those  being  necessaries  are  not  able  to  be 
dispensed  with? — and  .thus  a  dominant  party  or  section  force  most  of 
the  public  burdens  on  their  opponents  1  This  is  not  to  be  tolerated  a 
moment,  even  for  revenue,  on  any  sound  principles  of  taxation. 

Again :  as  a  revenue  measure,  it  has  not  yet  been  able  to  meet  the 
wants  of  the  government.  Deficiencies  have  already  occurred,  and 
been  supplied  by  loans,  in  a  period  of  profound  peace ;  and  the  proper 
official  organ  of  the  government  informs  us,  in  his  annual  report,  that 
more  deficiencies  are  likely  to  occur,  both  in  this  and  the  ensuing 
year.  Whether  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  was  correct  or  not  in 
his  estimates  (and  I  know,  from  experience,  there  is  no  little  diffi- 
culty, in  periods  of  fluctuation,  in  forming  accurate  opinions  as  to  the 
future),  it  was  safer  for  us  to  take,  in  the  main,  the  official  data. 
Certainly  the  tariff  has  not  yet  yielded  so  much,  by  five  millions,  the 
last  year,  as  some  of  its  friends  estimated  in  1842 ;  and  if  the  large 
returns  from  New  York  for  January  be  hastily  looked  to  as  a  guide 
for  the  whole  year,  the  aggregate  revenue  from  customs  will,  in 
1844,  exceed  forty  millions  of  dollars, — exceeding  the  previous  esti- 
mates of  the  chairman  near  twenty  millions. 

[Mr.  Evans  said  he  disclaimed  considering  them  a  guide  for  the 
whole  year.] 

I  think  it  will  be  prudent  not  to  consider  them  so,  or  we  must 

anticipate  another  ruinous  revulsion,  ere  long.     Besides  all  this,  the 

revenue  in  different  quarters  has  already  so  fluctuated,  under  this  bill, 

as  to  vary  a  million  or  more, —  sometimes  lower  and  sometimes  higher 

27* 


318  TARIFF. 

in  each, — ever  since  its  passage,  and  precludes  any  reliance  on  its 
steady  operation.  It  is  a  mistake,  too,  that  raising  the  duties  so  high  as 
these  are,  for  protection,  is  likely  to  raise  much  higher  the  aggregate 
of  revenue  than  it  would  be  if  none  exceeded  thirty  per  cent.,  when  we 
look  to  its  tendency  to  check  and  reduce  importations,  and  to  encour- 
age smuggling.  Their  increase  during  the  last  few  months  has  arisen 
from  the  impulses  given  to  the  commerce  of  the  world  by  opening  new 
markets,  and  the  low  rate  of  interest  for  capital  to  embark  in  new 
enterprises,  rather  than  from  any  benefits  to  the  revenue  or  business 
generally,  by  so  high  a  tariff. 

At  the  very  moment  while  we  are  deliberating,  the  returns  of  the 
receipts  from  customs  in  England,  the  last  quarter,  also  show  a  consid- 
erable rise ;  and  of  the  last  year,  if  deducting  the  revenue  on  corn, 
accidentally  high  in  1842,  a  larger  rise  still.  But  these  results  have 
happened  there  after  a  reduction  of  the  rate  of  many  duties,  leading  to 
a  larger  consumption,  showing  the  reverse  of  what  is  argued  as  the 
cause  here.  But,  in  truth,  the  opening  of  new  markets  in  Asia, 
among  three  or  four  hundred  millions  of  people,  or  near  half  of  the 
whole  human  race,  has  done  much  more,  both  in  Europe  and  America, 
to  revive  business  and  increase  revenue,  than  any  changes  in  duties, 
though  the  reduction  of  them  in  England  has  tended  to  increase  both 
consumption  and  revenue.  There  had  been  very  striking  illustrations, 
in  the  case  of  teas  and  spirits,  of  an  increase  of  revenue  in  the  aggre- 
gate, after  a  reduction  in  the  rate  of  duties.  (See  several  instances  in 
Porter's  View.)  I  will  not  detain  the  Senate  by  specifying  but  one, 
in  the  case  of  coffee,  which,  in  England,  on  a  duty  of  fifty  per  cent, 
less  in  1840  than  in  1824,  had  become  so  much  more  imported  and 
consumed  as  to  yield  more  than  double  the  amount  of  revenue.  The 
rise  in  revenue  supposed  to  have  taken  place  here  in  a  series  of  years 
after  the  increased  rate  of  duties  in  1816,  and  in  consequence  of  it,  is 
another  error  into  which  the  senator  from  Maine  has  fallen,  I  presume 
inadvertently ;  for  the  truth  is  just  the  reverse,  and  is  a  strong  proof 
that  a  protective  tariff  like  ours  tends  often  to  reduce  the  aggregate. 

Thus  the  net  revenue  from  customs  in  1817  was  about  twenty-six 
millions  and  a  quarter, — which,  on  the  credit  system  then  in  force, 
had  accrued  chiefly  on  the  imposts  and  tariff  in  force  in  1816.  Now, 
so  far  from  its  rising  above  that  sum  under  the  higher  duties  of  1816, 
or  the  still  higher  of  1824,  or  even  of  1828,  it  had,  in  1818,  fallen  to 
about  seventeen  millions;  and  had  never  again  equalled  twenty-six 
millions  till  1832 ;  and  then  had  become  larger,  not  by  means  of  more 
natural  business  and  of  higher  duties,  but  by  much  larger  imports, 
artificially  swollen,  to  bring  home  the  proceeds  of  State  loans  abroad. 

[Messrs.  Evans  and  Huntington  asked  from  what  source  Mr.  W. 
derived  his  data  as  to  the  duties,  since  the  documents  appended  to  the 
last  report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  did  not  give  like  amounts.] 

I  quote  from  the  official  receipts  and  expenditures,  published  in 
1842,  page  242;  and,  if  the  two  differ  in  some  details,  they  both 


TARIFF.  319 

agree  in  the  general  results  I  have  stated.  And  as  to  the  increase  of 
imports,  and  consequently  revenue,  by  means  of  the  State  debts,  Mr. 
Gallatin  and  others  have  computed  that,  during  eight  or  ten  years,  after 
adding  seven  and  a  half  millions  annually  for  profits,'  freights,  &c,  on 
the  exports,  the  aggregate  of  imports,  over  and  above  that,  had  been 
near  one  hundred  and  thirty  millions,  or  the  estimated  amount  of 
State  loans  effected  abroad  within  that  period.  If  we  look  to  naked 
figures,  without  exaniining  into  causes,  and  extending  research  over 
several  years,  we  are  likely  to  be  constantly  misled ;  but,  looking  to 
causes,  all  becomes  consistent  and  reconcilable  with  sound  principles. 

For  these  reasons,  without  specifying  others,  the  present  tariff  is 
exceedingly  defective  in  its  character  as  a  revenue  measure,  and  ought 
to  be  amended.  But  there  are  other  and  more  particular  reasons 
against  its  operations  on  the  community, — whether  regarded  as 
directly  protective  or  fiscal, — which  require  its  whole  form  and  sub- 
stance to  be  modified,  and  for  which  it  contains  no  redeeming  qualities 
sufficient  to  reconcile  us  to  its  continuance. 

It  is  so  framed  as,  in  fact,  to  impose  a  heavy  burden  on  large 
classes  and  sections  of  the  country,  and  thus  to  operate  in  favor  of 
small  classes  and  sections,  rather  than  for  the  treasury,  or  the  people, 
as  a  whole. 

Let  us  look  to  the  evidence  of  this.  Its  average  rate  of  duties  is 
so  near  forty  per  cent.,  that,  for  convenience  in  computation,  that  rate 
may  be  used.  Now,  sir,  calculating  that  under  it  we  import  and 
consume  only  thirty  millions  of  foreign  merchandise  similar  to  what  is 
manufactured  here,  the  tax  on  that  would  be  twelve  millions  of  dol- 
lars ;  whereas  a  revenue  duty  on  it  of  twenty  per  cent.,  for  the  benefit 
of  the  treasury,  would  amount  to  only  six  millions,  and  the  other  six 
are  paid  for  the  benefit  and  protection  of  the  domestic  rival  manufac- 
tures. 

In  the  next  place,  as  this  tax  of  forty  per  cent,  usually  enhances 
the  price  of  the  articles  to  that  extent,  these  similar  domestic  manu- 
factures are  raised  also  in  price  in  a  like  proportion.  This  must  be 
the  case,  or  a  higher  tariff  would  be  of  no  use  to  the  makers  of  those 
articles.  Now,  those  similar  domestic  manufactures  made  and  con- 
sumed in  this  country  equal  in  value  annually  about  two  hundred 
millions  of  dollars.  Forty  per  cent,  on  that  is  eighty  millions ;  but, 
as  half  of  it  would  be  gained  by  an  incidental  and  necessary,  equal 
and  proper  protection  from  a  twenty  per  cent,  revenue  tariff,  the  only 
addition  to  the  public  burdens,  by  the  partial  and  high  discriminations, 
is  forty  millions,  making,  with  the  other  six,  about  forty-six  millions 
paid  yearly  for  the  benefit  of  the  manufacturing  classes.  As  those 
classes  constitute  only  one-eleventh  of  our  whole  population,  ten- 
elevenths  of  the  sum  is  paid  by  other  classes,  for  the  benefit  of  merely 
that  one-eleventh.  This  is  a  monstrous  burden  imposed  on  the  others, 
higher  than  all  their  other  taxes,  both  to  the  State  and  General  Gov- 
ernments, without  computing  profits  on  it  by  wholesale  dealers  and 


320  TARIFF. 

retailers.  If  this  money  was  carried  out  of  the  country  yearly,  that 
circumstance  would  much  impoverish  it ;  but,  being  only  a  tribute  on 
some  here  for  the  benefit  of  others  here,  the  money  remains  within 
our  limits,  but  still  it  is  deliberately  fleeced  from  some  and  transferred 
to  others. 

If  those  others,  in  such  favorite  occupations,  do  not  thereby  grow  so 
wealthy  and  powerful  as  some  suppose,  it  is  not  for  the  want  of  pro- 
tection enough,  but,  as  will  hereafter  be  explained,  from  the  fluctua- 
tions in  their  business  caused  by  these  same  high  profits,  and  the 
frequent  changes  in  machinery,  and  the  losses  by  abortive  experi- 
ments, or  the  want  of  skill  in  the  management  by  some  persons  and 
in  some  places  comparatively  inexperienced. 

Now,  could  such  a  system,  so  unequal  and  anti-republican  as  this, 
and  so  oppressive  to  ten-elevenths  of  the  people,  stand  a  single  hour, 
if  the  facts  were  accurately  understood  1  No,  sir,  no !  But  the  fal- 
lacy is  widely  circulated,  that  the  increased  duty,  rather  than  enhanc- 
ing the  price  of  articles,  reduces  it ;  and  when  that  paradox  does  not 
gain  full  faith,  from  its  contradictions  to  experience  and  common  sense, 
as  well  as  theoretical  reason,  it  is  urged  that  the  apparent  beneficiaries 
of  the  tax  are  not  alone  aggrandized  by  it,  but  the  whole  country 
made  more  prosperous,  and  better  able  to  pay  enhanced  duties  and 
prices. 

Let  us  scrutinize  this  delusion  a  little.  That  higher  duties  make 
prices  lower,  is,  in  the  philosophy  of  the  American  system,  the  elephant 
on  which  stands  their  whole  globe.  It  is  entirely  a  discovery,  not  to 
say  invention,  of  its  supporters.  Abroad,  the  idea  is  deemed  prepos- 
terous. It  is  a  matter  of  course  in  general  principles,  —  and  Adam 
Smith,  Ricardo,  Huskisson,  McCulloch,  Tooke,  and  many  others, 
make  their  calculations,  —  that  an  enhanced  duty  augments  the  price 
just  as  naturally  as  that  higher  rents,  or  wages,  or  interest,  tend  to 
make  an  article  cost  more,  — just  as  naturally  as  more  fuel  added 
increases  the  fire,  more  rain  raises  the  streams. 

Franklin,  in  this  country,  as  we  have  already  seen,  says  that  high 
duties  on  the  importation  enables  the  manufacturer  to  tax  the  home 
consumer  by  greater  prices.  He  could  draw  lightning  from  the 
clouds,  but  he  could,  with  all  his  ingenuity  and  skill,  draw  no  other 
conclusion  than  this  from  high  duties.  It  may  be  sometimes  true,  as 
an  exception,  that  in  a  glut  of  the  market  the  importer  may  not  be 
able  to  sell  at  an  enhanced  price,  and  must  then  sell  at  a  loss,  if  at  all. 
Every  one  can  see,  however,  that  this  is  only  temporary  and  occa- 
sional. For  a  new  high  duty,  which,  as  the  senator  from  Maine  sup- 
poses, may  at  first  raise  prices,  and  thus  check  sales,  will,  if  they 
afterwards  fall,  from  the  market  being  overstocked,  bring  them  at  once 
up  again,  as  soon  as  the  supply  is  less  and  the  manufacture  less,  as  is 
usual  after  such  a  glut.  This  brief  fall  in  price,  too,  whenever  it  hap- 
pens, will,  for  a  like  reason,  cause  a  corresponding  fall  in  the  price  of 
the  agricultural  production  to  be  exchanged  for  the  manufacture ;  and, 


TARIFF.  321 

in  that  case,  it  will  require  no  prophet  to  foresee  that  such  a  fall  injures, 
in  its  consequences,  rather  than  benefits,  the  producer.  The  action  of 
everybody  in  daily  life  contradicts  the  whole  position  on  the  other  side, 
that,  as  a  general  principle,  prices  are  permanently  reduced  by  higher 
duties ;  or  why  do  persons,  after  high  duties,  smuggle  ?  If  they 
make  the  prices  here  lower,  the  smuggling  would  be  the  other  way. 
Why,  also,  are  our  tables  loaded  with  memorials  asking  for  drawbacks, 
or  to  remit  duties  on  railroad  iron,  if  they  make  its  price  lower?  Why 
do  nations  ever  retaliate  against  others  by  imposing  higher  duties,  if  it 
makes  their  articles  lower,  and  hence  more  in  demand  for  consump- 
tion ?  Indeed,  why  do  the  manufacturers  themselves  ask  for  higher 
duties  on  the  manufactured  articles,  if  the  price  is  not  thereby  increased  ?- 
And  why  ask  for  low  duties,  or  entire  freedom  to  the  raw  material,  if 
it  be  not  thereby  made  lower?  (See  Table  No.  4.)*  And  why  oppose 
a  reduction,  as  now,  if  that  reduction  would  not  tend  to  reduce  prices'? 
What,  sir  !  have  we  not  the  resolution  of  the  high-tariff  legislature  of 
Vermont,  just  offered  here,  to  continue  the  present  high  duties  on 
wool  1  And  why  is  this,  except  that,  in  their  opinion,  frankly  admitted, 
the  price  of  that  great  staple  with  them  has  been  thereby  enhanced  1 
The  whole  misconception,  beyond  the  slight  temporary  exceptions 
before  alluded  to,  appears  to  arise  from  what  undoubtedly  is  a  fact 
in  this  country,  that  most  manufactured  articles  have  fallen  throughout 
the  world  since  high  duties  had  begun  to  be  imposed,  in  1816.  But, 
in  the  first  place,  a  fall  in  many  of  these  commenced  before  1816  ;  in 
the  next  place,  every  sequence  was  not  a  consequence ;  everything 
after  an  event  did  not  happen  on  account  of  it,  or  we  might  attrib- 
ute this  fall  to  the  war  of  1812,  or  the  great  eclipse  of  1806,  as  the 
fall  had  occurred  after  both.  In  cases  like  these,  we  must  probe  to 
the  bottom  and  eviscerate  the  true  causes  and  consequences  of  events, 
and  not  virtually  take  up  the  irrational,  if  not  absurd  idea,  that  high 
national  taxes  of  any  kind  are  a  blessing,  any  more  than  that  a  great 
national  debt  is  a  national  blessing. 

It  was,  on  some  accounts,  perhaps,  unfortunate  that  this  notion  had 
not  been  discovered  earlier,  when  our  fathers  considered  themselves  so 
much  oppressed  by  a  higher  tax  on  tea,  and  when  the  French  so  griev- 
ously complained  and  rebelled  against  the  gabelle,  or  high  salt  tax ; 
none  of  them  being  so  long-sighted  then  as  to  dream  that  the  prices 
were  thereby  reduced.  But,  seriously,  Mr.  President,  if  any  still 
doubt  on  this  subject,  let  them  look  a  little  into  the  cautious  and  well- 
considered  work  on  prices  which  I  hold  in  my  hand,  by  Tooke  (edi- 
tion of  1838),  not  swollen  with  loose  theories,  but  facts,  —  recorded 
and  authentic  facts, —  giving  the  history  and  causes  of  the  fluctuations 
in  prices  in  England,  during  the  last  half-century.  It  never  entered 
his  imagination,  because  they  rose  generally  from  1795  to  1815,  and 
fell  generally  from  1815  to  1842,  that  this  proceeded  at  all  from  lower 
duties  in  the  first  period,  or  higher  ones  in  the  second.    The  fact  as  to 

*  Appendix,  H. 


322  TARIFF. 

duties  was,  in  most  cases,  directly  the  reverse.  No,  sir ;  the  true  and 
general  causes  of  a  fall  in  prices  are,  first,  a  greater  quantity  of  the 
article  produced,  without  a  greater  demand  ;  —  whether  produced  in 
agriculture,  by  more  fertile  seasons,  better  manures  or  tools:  or  in 
manufactures,  by  improved  machinery,  with  chemical  discoveries ;  or 
in  both,  by  more  hands  released  from  war  and  other  unproductive 
employments,  and  devoted  to  either  of  those  pursuits; — and,  secondly, 
by  a  contraction  of  the  amount  of  the  currency,  whether  paper  or 
specie,  by  which  the  price  is  measured ;  while  a  rise  happens  by  the 
reverse  of  these,  or  an  addition  to  the  tax  or  expense  in  making  the 
articles,  or  the  opening  of  new  and  better  markets.  Hence,  if  a  fall 
occurs  from  one  of  the  first  causes,  it  would  be  still  greater  if  none  of 
the  last  intervene  to  counteract  it  in  any  degree,  —  such  as  a  higher 
duty,  an  expansion  in  the  currency,  or  a  new  market.  But  these  last 
may,  and  do,  in  some  cases,  not  counteract  it  entirely ;  and  then  the 
cry  is,  that  the  higher  duty  lowers  the  price,  when,  in  fact,  the  other 
causes  exist  and  lower  it,  —  and  would  make  it  lower  still,  but  for  the 
higher  duty. 

How  unphilosophical  it  is,  likewise,  when  good,  pertinent,  and  long- 
established  causes  exist  to  lower  prices,  to  hunt  for  another  cause, 
not  certain  or  rational,  and  conjure  that  up  as  the  true  one ! 

But,  enough  on  the  reasoning  connected  with  this  fallacy,  so  wide, 
and  so  pervading  the  ranks  of  the  friends  to  high  protection,  and 
which,  if  removed,  the  whole  fabric  must  totter  to  its  base.  How  are 
the  recorded  facts,  no  less  than  the  reasoning  1  Not  a  single  case  here 
and  there,  and  for  a  month  or  a  year ;  but  how,  on  both  continents, 
and  for  a  long  series  of  years,  and  as  to  numerous  articles  1  I  have 
before  me  various  schedules  of  prices-current,  both  in  England  and 
America.  They  all  show  conclusively  that,  since  1795,  from  the 
causes  first  named,  agricultural  products  in  England  have  generally 
risen,  though  the  highest  duties  have  been  imposed  there  for  their  pro- 
tection ;  they,  rather  than  manufactures,  being  there  the  pets  or  favor- 
ites for  protection  with  the  great  landed  gentry  and  aristocracy,  that 
fill  the  two  Houses  of  Parliament.  At  the  same  time,  they  show  that, 
from  the  first-named  causes,  and  especially  improvements  in  machinery 
and  in  chemistry,  manufactures  have  fallen  in  price, — and  this  when 
the  duty  was  low,  as  well  as  when  high.     (See  Tables  7  and  8.)* 

Indeed,  the  difference  between  the  official  and  real  valuation  of 
exports  there,  which  indicates  on  the  public  and  authentic  records  the 
changes  in  price  since  1690,  shows  that  the  whole,  from  various  causes, 
have  fallen,  in  the  aggregate,  something  like  fifty-eight  per  cent.  The 
writer  before  me  says  : 

"We  have  taken  out  of  the  list  of  exports  the  leading  articles  of  agricultural  prod- 
uce for  three  years  (1840,  1841,  1842),  the  value  of  which  we  find  would  have  been, 
in  1694  (one  hundred  and  fifty  years  ago),  £1,557,993  ;  hut  which  have  now 
increased  to  a  value  of  £3,778,321,  being  an  advance  in  price  of  143  per  cent. 

*  Appendix,  K  and  L. 


TARIFF.  323 

'«  We  have  also  taken  out  some  of  the  leading  articles  of  manufactures  for  the  same 
time,  the  value  of  which  Ave  find  would  have  been,  in  1694,  £267,636,717;  but  which 
are  now  reduced  to  a  value  of  £107,173,382,  being  a  reduction  of  price  of  60  per  cent. 
Thus  showing  that,  while  manufactured  goods*  and  minerals  have  fallen  considerably 
more  than  a  half,  agricultural  produce  has  much  more  than  doubled  its  value. 

"  Butter  and  cheese  have  risen  in  price,  during  that  period,  193  per  cent. 

"  Corn,  flour,  &c,  have  risen  161  per  cent. 

"  Cows  have  risen  in  price  209  per  cent. 

"  Horses  have  risen  in  price  267  per  cent. 

"  Wool  has  risen  in  price  169  per  cent. 

"  While  cotton  manufactures  have  fallen  in  price,  during  that  period,  73  per  cent. 

"  Coals  have  fallen  in  price  60  per  cent. 

"  Iron  and  steel  have  fallen  in  price  45  per  cent. 

"Linen  manufactures  have  fallen  in  price  36  per  cent. 

"And,  what  is  very  curious,  while  wool  has  risen  169  per  cent.,  woollen  manufac- 
tures have  fallen  10  per  cent,  in  price." — Economist,  Nov.  4,  1843. 

In  the  United  States,  prices-current  in  Boston  and  New  York,  for 
a  long  series  of  years,  as  to  numerous  articles,  have  likewise  been 
examined.  They  show  a  general  fall  in  price  here  of  agricultural  arti- 
cles, not  prevented  entirely  even  under  an  expanded  currency  in  1814 
and  1836.  But  this  fall  has  occurred  from  great  and  cheap  produc- 
tion on  our  cheap  and  fertile  and  extensive  soil ;  and  could  not  hap- 
pen from  high  protective  duties,  they  having  been  low  on  such  agri- 
cultural products  as  are  much  imported,  or  entirely  free  on  several  of 
them. 

These  tables  showed,  further,  a  fall  in  some  manufactured  articles 
where  the  duties  ranged  high,  and  in  others  where  low.  But  this  fall 
manifestly  happened  from  improvements  in  machinery  and  steam  (the 
great  and  distinguishing  features  of  the  age),  or  from  new  mines 
opened ;  and  in  spite  of  high  duties,  rather  than  being  their  conse- 
quences. Think  you,  sir,  that  a  minimum  duty  on  cottons  here  has 
caused  the  fall  in  their  price  in  both  Europe  and  America,  rather  than 
the  inventions  of  Arkwright  in  spinning,  or  Cartwright  in  weaving,  or 
Watts  in  steam,  any  more  than  the  duty  here  on  the  raw  material 
has  caused  its  fall  two-thirds,  rather  than  the  wonderful  cotton-gin  of 
Whitney,  and  our  exuberant  soil  ?  The  tables  compiled  from  McCul- 
loch,  Tooke,  and  the  prices-current  in  New  York,  are  at  the  service 
of  any  senator.  (Nos.  7,  8  to  11.)*  I  shall  not  repeat  their  details  ; 
but  merely  state,  as  most  striking  refutations  of  the  theory  on  the 
other  side,  that  in  England  the  manufactured  article  of  saltpetre  has 
fallen  more  than  most  others, —  viz.,  from  one  hundred  and  thirty-five 
shillings  per  hundred  weight,  in  1795  to  twenty-one  shillings,  in  1838, 
— though  on  a  low  duty  ;  and  log- wood  from  eleven  shillings  per  ton 
to  seven,  though  free ;  and  salt  from  six  shillings,  and  during  war 
nineteen  shillings,  to  only  one  shilling  and  threepence,  in  1838, 
though  then  entirely  free.  The  first  was  manifestly  caused  by 
improvements  in  chemistry,  and  new  discoveries ;  and  the  two  last, 
as  in  this  country,  from  new  and  greater  supplies,  combined  with  lower 

*  Appendix,  K,  L  to  0. 


324  TARIFF. 

duties  there,  and  in  spite  of  high  ones  here  on  the  great  condiment  of 
life. 

The  tables  in  second  Tooke,  390  p.  (edition  1838),  show  further 
that  the  price  of  timber  has  risen  under  a  rising  duty,  and  tobacco  not 
risen  nor  fallen,  though  taxed  with  a  duty  computed  by  the  chairman 
at  two  thousand  per  cent.  One  would  suppose  the  last  high  enough, 
on  his  theory,  to  make  the  price  fall  next  to  nothing. 

Here  plaster  of  Paris  j  though  free,  and  not  a  manufacture,  has  fallen 
as  much  or  more  than  others,  viz.,  from  twenty  dollars  per  ton,  in  1811, 
to  only  two  dollars  and  twenty-five  cents,  in  1844 ;  and,  of  course, 
from  other  causes  than  high  duties.  Indeed,  out  of  two  hundred  and 
sixteen  articles  on  which  prices  had  fallen  some  years  since,  as  large  a 
number  were  ascertained,  by  the  late  inquisitive  Condy  Raguet,  to  be 
such  as  were  free,  or  on  a  low  duty,  as  on  a  high ;  thus  indicating, 
with  unerring  certainty,  the  great  and  general  operation  of  other 
causes.  All  can  remember  how  the  price  of  sugar  fell,  a  few  years 
ago,  here,  under  a  falling  duty ;  and  how  it  has  risen  again,  like  the 
Vermont  wool,  and  cordage,  and  cottons,  under  a  higher  duty.  Not 
that  all  articles  are  falling  or  rising,  in  all  cases,  entirely  from  the 
change  in  duty,  but  always  higher  than  they  otherwise  would  be  if  a 
duty  exists,  and  lower  than  they  otherwise  would  be  if  one  does  not 
exist.  Indeed,  the  great  advocate  of  the  protective  system  (Mr.  Clay) 
at  last  virtually  conceded  away  this  whole  ground,  in  1832,  by  express- 
ing a  willingness  to  reduce  several  of  the  high  duties  so  as  to  relieve 
the  consumption  of  the  country;  but  which  could  not  be  thus  relieved 
unless  high  duties  had  made  prices  higher, — proving,  in  these  ways, 
the  position  that  prices  of  articles  are  usually  made  higher  to  the  extent 
of  the  duty.  It  then  follows  that  the  consumer  of  such  articles  is 
usually  obliged  to  pay  as  much  more  for  them  on  that  account.  Such 
is  the  plain  common  sense  of  the  case.  Such  is  the  doctrine  of  all 
the  leading  economists  abroad,  as  well  as  of  Franklin ;  and  even  Ham- 
ilton was  forced  to  admit  that  this  was  oftenest  the  case,  and  when  not 
so,  the  increase  fell  on  the  merchant,  and  was  still  more  ruinous  to 
him.  (See  Federalist,  before  cited.)  Mr.  Dallas  entertained  a  like 
idea.  (See  Report,  February,  1816.)  And  it  can  never  fall  on  the 
foreign  producer  any  longer  than  to  affect  his  present  stock  in  a  few 
cases,  till  he  reduces  his  production,  and  thus  prevents  a  glut. 

It  then  follows  that,  as  a  general  principle,  the  enhanced  price  of 
the  foreign  article,  and  also  of  the  domestic  article,  is  paid  by  the 
consumer.  This,  we  have  already  shown,  equals  here  now,  beyond  a 
fair  revenue,  about  forty- three  millions  of  dollars  yearly ;  and,  as  the 
manufacturers  constitute  but  one-eleventh  of  the  whole,  ten-elevenths 
of  it  is  paid  by  other  consumers,  and  for  the  benefit  of  that  one- 
eleventh.  As  most  of  these  others  belong  to  the  agricultural  classes, — 
they  being  nearly  three-fourths  of  all  our  population, — the  great  mass 
of  this  enormous  burden  is  thrown  on  them,  and  must  induce  them,  in 
time,  as  the  real  facts  are  well  understood,  to  demolish  the  whole  sys- 


TARIFF.  325 

tern  of  partial  protection,  and  require,  as  some  of  us  do  now,  that  a 
tariff  for  sucli  protection  be  corrected,  without  unnecessary  delay. 
What  does  it  amount  to  per  head  yearly,  including  their  families  1 
Over  two  dollars  to  each  man,  woman,  and  child,  on  an  average. 
What,  in  the  gross,  are  the  present  duties  on  a  few  separate  articles 
of  great,  vital,  and  universal  necessity?  On  iron,  at  twenty-five 
pounds  per  head,  it  is  five  hundred  million  pounds  for  our  whole  popu- 
lation, now  twenty  millions  of  people ;  and  the  tax  on  this,  at  only  three 
cents  per  pound,  is  fifteen  millions  of  dollars,  ten-elevenths  of  which 
is  paid  by  others  than  the  manufacturers.  On  sugar,  at  fourteen  pounds 
per  head,  at  two  and  one-half  cents  per  pound,  the  tax  is  seven  mil- 
lions of  dollars  more  ;  and  on  salt  alone,  without  going  into  other  arti- 
cles, it  is,  at  a  bushel  per  head,  quite  a  million  and  a  half  of  dollars. 

As  an  illustration  how  this  presses  on  my  own  State,  with  a  population 
of  about  300,000,  and  the  large  mass  of  them  farmers,  the  tax  for 
iron  alone  equals  $225,000,  or  four  times  the  amount  of  the  whole 
State  tax;  on  sugar  $109,000  more,  and  on  salt  $24,000, — making, 
on  only  three  articles,  an  aggregate  of  more  than  a  third  of  a  million, 
and  near  seven  times  the  whole  of  what  is  technically  our  State  tax. 

None  of  our  population  get  relieved  from  this,  except  the  few  who 
make  of  these  articles  as  much  as  they  consume.  All  can  see,  in  a 
moment,  how  this  prevents  the  consumer  from  being  able  to  buy,  or 
enjoy,  or  lay  up  so  much,  with  the  same  money  and  means,  as  he  oth- 
erwise could ;  for,  by  the  rise  of  price,  he  gets  but  three  or  four  pounds 
of  iron,  sugar,  &c,  for  the  same  money  or  value  of  produce,  where 
before  he  got  five, — the  cost  of  the  difference  going  to  the  manufacturer 
and  the  revenue.  The  whole  Union,  as  consumers,  and  so  far  as  not 
makers  of  such  articles,  feel  the  discriminating  oppression ;  and  are 
thus,  in  the  north  as  well  as  the  south,  the  east  and  the  Middle  States, 
as  well  as  the  giant  west,  all  suffering  under  its  unequal  bearing,  by 
means  of  the  present  tariff. 

But  look  at  another  aspect  of  the  inquiry,  as  affecting  the  producing 
classes.  The  producer  is  usually  a  farmer,  or  planter,  or  manufac- 
turer, though  those  connected  with  the  last  class  are  only  about  a  mil- 
lion and  a  half  to  twelve  millions  and  three-fourths  connected  with  the 
two  former.  Now,  if  the  producer  has  to  pay  forty  per  cent,  more  on 
many  indispensable  articles  which  he  consumes,  it  will  soon  be  mani- 
fest that,  unless  a  manufacturer,  and  thus  indemnified,  he  suffers  doubly 
under  this  system,  and  especially  as  compared  with  any  other  con- 
sumer. 

I  shall  not  now  enter  into  any  technical  reasoning  about  what  is 
called  the  forty-bale  theory,  though  it  would  be  troublesome  to  defeat 
by  argument  the  cogent  reasoning  of  the  senator  before  me  (Mr. 
McDuffie).  But  this  much  is  demonstrable,  that  such  producers  are 
first  burdened  and  injured  by  the  higher  price  of  what  they  consume. 
Whether  they  purchase  it  here  with  money,  or  bring  it  home  in 
exchange  for  what  they  produce  and  send  abroad,  the  consequence  is 
28 


326  TAKIFF. 

the  same, —  that  they  get  less  in  amount  for  consumption ;  and  when  it 
is  argued  that,  in  such  a  case,  they  had  better  not  use  foreign  articles 
so  raised  in  price,  but  bring  home  money,  pray  what  is  to  be  done  with 
the  money  1  —  not  eaten,  nor  worn,  but  some  of  it  exchanged  here  for 
necessaries  or  luxuries  ;  and,  whether  of  domestic  or  foreign  manufac- 
ture, enhanced  in  price  so  that  he  cannot  procure  or  enjoy  so  many  of 
them.  It  is  this  excessive  taxation^  in  all  possible  ways,  on  the  pro- 
ducer in  England,  that  tempts  Parliament  to  continue  the  corn-law 
duties,  with  a  view  to  remunerate  the  agriculturist,  by  higher  prices, 
thus  caused,  for  his  great  staples.  And  yet,  after  all  that,  having  (as 
he  has  almost)  a  monopoly  of  food,  he  grinds  the  laborer  into  riots  and 
incendiarism ;  while  the  manufacturer  —  not  so  much  the  pet  there  — 
works  so  near  the  minimum  price  necessary  to  sustain  life,  that  a  bad 
harvest  and  rise  in  food,  or  a  rise  in  cotton  and  a  glut  of  markets,  so 
as  to  diminish  manufacturing,  throws  millions  upon  public  charity  for 
their  daily  bread.  Much  of  these  crying  evils  arise  from  excessive 
taxation  in  various  ways,  and  especially  high  duties  on  corn, —  some 
bearing  on  one  kind  of  produce  and  some  on  another, —  and  all  fall 
there  on  the  humiliated  laborer,  whether  engaged  in  manufactures  or 
agriculture.  The  relief  there,  as  well  as  here,  is  the  great  problem ; 
and  it  is  to  be  found  in  reducing  and  not  raising  taxation,  and  furnish- 
ing both  bread  and  clothing,  as  well  as  all  other  materials,  each  from 
the  places  where  they  can,  in  the  present  state  of  society,  and  without 
forced  means,  be  made  cheapest.  Then,  God's  bounties,  in  every  cli- 
mate and  stage  of  improvement  in  society,  will,  by  commerce,  become 
interchanged  and  universally  diffused,  and  the  whole  human  family  be 
blessed,  rather  than  oppressed,  by  each  other's  advantages  and  excel- 
lences. 

Proceed,  then,  and  lower  the  highest  duties  here,  and  the  revenue 
would  still  be  sufficient ;  and,  other  things  remaining  unchanged,  the 
laborer,  as  well  as  producer,  will  be  able  to  consume  not  only  as  much 
more  as  the  difference  of  duty  would  buy,  but  industry  and  the  prices 
of  his  own  products  will  be  so  increased  to  the  producer  that  he  will 
be  able  to  buy  much  more.  A  most  memorable  instance  of  a  change 
in  tins  respect  occurred  in  the  case  of  coffee  in  England,  of  which,  under 
a  high  duty  of  two  shillings  and  sixpence  per  pound,  in  1824,  when 
foreign,  and  one  shilling  when  colonial,  but  8,262,943  pounds  were 
consumed.  But  the  duties  being  then  reduced  one-half,  the  consump- 
tion, from  that  and  other  causes,  increased,  by  1840,  to  28,664,336 
pounds.  [Mr.  Evans  here  asked  if  England  produced  any  coffee ;  to 
which  Mr.  Woodbury  replied,  that  she  produced  some  in  her  colonies, 
as  well  as  sugar.]  It  is  a  remarkable  fact,  that,  the  duties  remaining 
high  during  that  same  period  on  sugar,  the  consumption  of  it  fell  off 
377,302  hundred  weight. 

Producers  are  next  suffering  by  not  being  able,  under  high  duties, 
to  purchase  lands  and  stock  and  hire  labor  to  the  extent  they  other- 
wise might,  in  order  to  increase  the  quantity  of  their  produce.     It  is 


TARIFF.  327 

also  certain  that,  under  this  system,  produce  is  likely  to  sell  for  less, 
because  their  markets  abroad  are  exposed  to  be  cut  off  and  diminished 
much  more  than  under  a  system  of  low  duties  and  liberal  reciprocity. 

Thus  it  is  that  the  great  agricultural  producers  in  the  south  and 
west  feel  so  deeply  the  evils  of  this  system,  having  little  or  no  remu- 
neration for  them,  or  relief  from  them,  as  the  manufacturers  them- 
selves have,  and,  in  some  respects,  in  the  north,  part  of  those  living  in 
their  immediate  neighborhoods.  And  if  it  were  not  for  the  low  price 
of  lands  in  this  country,  and  their  virgin  richness  and  blessed  fertility, 
the  distress  and  prostration  would,  in  past  years,  with  farmers,  have 
been  much  severer. 

Next,  their  markets  are  thus  exposed  to  become  cramped  or  deteri- 
orated, under  retaliations ;  and  the  great  principle  of  trade  is  acknowl- 
edged now,  by  most  people,  as  laid  down  by  Franklin, —  that  commerce 
must,  in  order  to  nourish  durably,  consist  of  mutual  exchanges. 
Writing  to  a  French  gentleman,  he  says,  (vol.  v.,  p.  869)  : 

'*  We  are  much  pleased  with  the  disposition  of  your  government  to  favor  our  com- 
merce, manifested  in  the  late  reglement.  You  appear  to  be  possessed  of  a  truth  which 
few  governments  are  possessed  of, —  that  A  must  take  some  of  B's  produce,  otherwise 
B  will  not  be  able  to  pay  for  what  he  would  take  of  A. " 

The  evil  operation,  naturally  attendant  on  a  high  and  discriminating 
tariff,  to  injure  all  markets  abroad,  is  one  which  presses  hard  on  the 
friends  of  such  a  system.  And  hence  it  is  a  favorite  ground  assumed 
by  them,  that  the  foreign  markets  are  of  trifling  consequence  to  the 
producer,  compared  with  the  domestic  or  home  market,  and  that  they 
but  little  affect  his  prices ;  and  that  their  system  furnishes  a  demand 
so  much  better  for  all  produced  as  to  atone  for  the  loss  of  all  markets 
abroad. 

Now,  sir,  as  these  positions  are  deemed,  by  their  authors,  great  pil- 
lars to  support  the  protective  system,  I  will  ask  your  indulgence  a 
short  time,  in  order  to  expose  how  utterly  unfounded  they  are,  on  the 
real  facts  applicable  to  them ;  and  to  show  afterwards  the  further  evils 
of  this  system  to  navigation  and  the  fisheries,  and  even  to  sound  man- 
ufacturing industry,  no  less  than  to  the  great  classes  of  consumers  and 
producers,  so  as  to  be  entirely  unatoned  for  by  any  benefits  really 
resulting  from  it. 

In  pursuing  this  discussion  further,  Mr.  President,  in  the  manner  I 
have  proposed,  I  should  be  trespassing  uselessly  on  the  patience  of  the 
Senate,  if  my  best  endeavors  were  not  exerted  to  elicit  truth.  I 
would  try  to  settle  contradictory  opinions  as  to  some  facts,  by  a  fuller 
and  more  dispassionate  consideration  of  them ;  and,  if  possible,  recon- 
cile a  majority  to  such  changes  in  the  existing  tariff  as  are,  in  painful 
sincerity,  believed  by  me  to  be  necessary  for  the  preservation  of  sound 
principles  in  taxation,  equal  justice  to  all,  and  the  prosperity  and 
peace  of  the  country. 

The  idea  that  our  foreign  markets  have  not  improved  under  the  low- 


328  TARIFF. 

ering  duties  from  1882  to  1842,  compared  with  what  they  were  the 
ten  years  previous,  under  higher  rates,  is  very  erroneous. 

The  value  of  domestic  produce  exported  in  1822  was  $49,874,079, 
and  in  1832  but  $63,137,470,  or  an  increase  of  only  about  twenty- 
five  per  cent.;  while  in  1842  the  value  was  $92,969,996,  or  an 
increase  of  nearly  fifty  per  cent.  If  the  aggregate  of  these  exports 
in  all  the  first  ten  years  was  compared  with  that  of  the  last,  the 
increase  in  the  last  over  the  first  would  be  nearly  one  hundred  per 
cent.  Some  had  supposed  that  this  increase  had  been  confined  to 
southern  staples  alone;  but  while  cotton  had  augmented,  rice  and 
tobacco  had  been  nearly  stationary.  And  the  great  staples  of  the  west,  ■ 
and  Middle  States,  and  north,  not  consumed  by  the  south  while 
making  the  cotton,  and  thus  obtaining  a  larger  and  better  market 
through  the  cotton  raised  and  sent  abroad, —  such  as  the  exports  of 
breadstuffs,  pork,  lard,  beef,  butter  and  cheese,  lumber,  lead,  and  even 
of  manufactures, — have  augmented. 

Indeed,  almost  the  whole  of  the  fourteen  and  a  half  millions  of 
pounds  of  lead  we  now  send  to  foreign  markets  have  sprung  up 
within  the  last  ten  years ;  and,  as  shown  in  the  table  before  me,  even 
within  the  last  three  our  exports  of  beef  have  trebled.  So  of  pork  and 
lard,  and  also  of  butter  and  cheese.     (See  Table  No.  12.)* 

Again :  an  impression  had,  by  some,  been  sedulously  inculcated,  that 
England  took  little  or  nothing  of  our  domestic  products  for  herself  and 
her  dependencies,  and  therefore  we  ought,  in  retaliation,  to  tax  high 
her  manufactures.  I  am  not  the  apologist  of  either  England  or 
France,  in  their  ancient  commercial  policy,  in  some  respects,  towards 
this  country ;  but  it  is  due  to  historical  truth  and  justice  to  admit  that, 
of  late  years,  they  take  large  portions  of  our  surplus  produce,  being 
our  two  greatest  markets  in  the  world. 

In  respect  to  England,  when  buying  our  productions  which  are  not 
luxuries, —  like  tobacco,  standing  on  a  peculiar  and  different  basis, — 
she  takes  them  on  duties  not  usually  so  high  as  our  own,  and  recently 
under  several  reductions,  which  we  have  very  illy  reciprocated  by  the 
present  higher  tariff.  Let  us  test  this  by  evidence,  for  I  ask  nothing 
on  naked  assertion.  I  hold  in  my  hand  statements  of  our  exports 
of  domestic  produce  to  England  and  her  dependencies,  in  1822,  1832, 
and  1842.     (See  Table  13.)t 

They  increased  about  twenty-four  per  cent,  in  the  first  period,  but 
over  forty  per  cent,  in  the  last  one ;  and  they  considerably  exceed  one- 
half  of  all  our  exports  of  that  kind  to  all  quarters  of  the  globe.  Is  this 
nothing,  as  a  growing  advantage,  by  way  of  market,  to  all  our  pro- 
ducers, and  to  be  encouraged  by  reciprocal  liberality  1 — especially  when 
we  recall  to  mind  the  further  fact  that  she  takes  even  more  of  us, 
yearly,  than  we  do  of  her,  to  the  extent  of  four  or  five  millions  of 
dollars.  Is  not  this  such  a  favorable  balance  of  trade  to  us,  and  such 
a  large  market, —  more  than  all  the  rest  of  the  world, —  as  to  deserve 

*  Appendix,  P.  t  Appendix,  Q. 


TAKIFF.  329 

some  little  regard  and  conciliatory  spirit  1  Yet  the  policy  of  much  of 
the  existing  tariff  is,  on  the  contrary,  almost  vindictive  towards  her 
chief  productions.  Again,  as  shown  by  my  friend  before  me  (Mr. 
McDuffie),  she  takes  of  our  cotton  over  $30,000,000  a  year,  nigh 
two-thirds  of  the  whole  amount  exported, —  our  greatest  article  sent 
abroad ;  and  in  wliich  not  South  Carolina  alone  is  interested  (as  many 
affect  to  suppose),  but  still  more  Georgia,  Alabama,  and  Mississippi, 
with  parts  of  North  Carolina,  Louisiana,  Tennessee,  and  Arkansas,  as 
well  as,  indirectly,  every  other  State  which  furnishes  to  them  supplies, 
agricultural  or  manufactured. 

Beside  this,  and  more  than  one-fifth  of  our  rice  exported,  she  takes 
over  one-third  of  the  tobacco,  and  has  always  been  one  of  our  largest 
customers  for  both ;  thus  presenting,  in  spite  of  her  large  duties  on  the 
last  as  a  luxury,  one  of  the  best  markets  for  the  great  production  of 
still  other  States,  including  Maryland,  Virginia,  Ohio,  and  Missouri. 
But  it  is  often  alleged  that  she  takes  little  that  is  the  produce  of  the 
free  States,  and  particularly  of  breadstuffs,  pork,  beef,  &c, —  more 
directly  interesting  to  the  central  States,  those  beyond  the  Alleghanies, 
—  and  the  agriculture,  fisheries,  and  manufactures,  of  the  east.  For- 
tunately, sir,  when  we  take  the  trouble  to  scrutinize  the  official  docu- 
ments, this  delusion  becomes  entirely  dispelled. 

In  1822,  when  we  sent  to  England  and  her  dependencies  not  one- 
third  of  all  our  exports  of  flour,  wheat,  corn,  and  other  breadstuffs,  her 
harsh  system  of  corn-laws  had  recently  been  adopted  on  the  same  high 
protective  system  in  favor  of  her  agriculture  which  we  ourselves  have 
so  indiscreetly  introduced  in  the  present  tariff  to  aid  our  manufactures. 
But,  notwithstanding  the  just  complaints  against  that  system,  our 
intercourse  through  her  neighboring  colonies,  from  which  the  duty  is 
lower,  and  our  proximity  to  her  West  India  islands,  gradually  enabled 
us  to  send  to  her  and  her  dependencies,  at  a  profit,*  over  one-half  of  all 
those  exports ;  and,  by  1842,  over  two-thirds  of  the  whole,  and  equalling 
in  value  fifty  per  cent,  more  than  all  the  tobacco  and  rice  sent  to  them. 

In  fine,  she  takes  largely  of  our  beef,  pork,  and  dairy ;  also  of  the 
products  of  our  forest  and  the  ocean,  and  even  of  the  factory,  as  well 
as  of  raw  cotton  and  grain.  And  her  increased  and  increasing  demands 
for  most  of  these,  if  not  repulsed  and  thwarted  by  high  tariffs,  rendered 
this  consideration  a  momentous  one,  not  only  to  the  south,  but  to  all 
the  grain-growing  States,  whether  on  the  Atlantic  or  on  the  rivers  and 
lakes  of  the  mighty  west,  and  gave  it  an  interest  to  every  farmer  and 
fisherman,  and  many  a  mechanic,  in  the  valleys  and  on  the  hill-tops, 
on  the  sea-shores  and  in  the  villages  of  the  busy  north.  Without 
dwelling  too  long  on  details,  the  value  of  beef  now  taken  by  her  is 
double  what  it  was  in  1822 ;  the  pork  and  lard,  near  two  hundred  per 
cent,  more ;  and  the  butter  and  cheese,  near  six  times  as  much ;  while, 
from  our  forests,  she  purchases  near  one-fourth  of  what  we  export  in 
lumber,  and  six-sevenths  of  all  our  tar  and  other  naval  stores. 

[Mr.  Benton.     Please  to  repeat  that.] 
28* 


830  TARIFF. 

Yes,  sir.  She  takes  quite  six-sevenths  of  all  our  naval  stores 
exported ;  and  though  that  is  important  to  your  native  State  (North 
Carolina),  another  fact  is  becoming  still  more  important  to  the  State 
of  your  adoption, —  to  Missouri, —  and  also  to  Illinois, —  that,  instead 
of  now  importing  most  of  our  lead  from  England,  we  supply  from  our 
own  mines,  on  account  of  their  natural  fertility,  and  not  by  hot-bed 
protection,  firstly  our  own  great  wants,  and  next,  send  it  across  the 
equator, —  double,  with  it,  both  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope  and  Cape 
Horn,  and  supply  China,  as  well  as  the  Sandwich  Islands  of  the  Pacific ; 
and  last,  but  not  least,  send  to  England  herself  near  one-sixth  of  the 
whole  we  now  export,  while  in  1822  she  took  not  a  pound,  and  in 
1832  but  twenty-two  dollars'  worth. 

From  our  fisheries  she  takes,  also,  half  the  sperm  oil  we  export, 
instead  of  nothing  in  1822,  and  but  a  pittance  in  1832.  But  let  me 
ask  the  gentlemen  on  the  other  side  if  even  the  manufacturers  would 
be  quite  as  well  situated  as  to  a  market  for  their  eight  or  nine  millions 
of  exports,  if  England  and  her  dependencies  were  not  open  to  many  of 
them?  She  has  admitted  even  our  cotton  manufactures  into  India, 
and  some  of  them  were  used  to  help  to  clothe  the  very  troops  that 
marched  to  Afghanistan.  She  takes  an  increasing  quantity  of  our 
domestic  salt  in  Canada ;  from  one  to  two  hundred  thousand  dollars' 
worth  of  our  nails  in  her  West  Indies ;  more  and  more  of  our  sperm 
and  tallow  candles ;  a  third  of  a  million  of  our  manufactures  from 
tobacco ;  and  very  considerable  proportions  of  the  soap,  leather,  shoes, 
boots,  &c.  &c,  which  help  to  swell  the  exports  of  our  domestic  manu- 
factures. 

But,  not  to  be  tedious  on  this  point,  mark  the  contrast,  also,  in  the 
present  rate  of  her  duties  on  many  of  these  articles.  On  the  greatest, 
—  cotton, —  only  seven  and  a  half  per  cent. ;  on  lard,  only  seven  per 
cent. ;  on  wheat,  into  Canada,  only  seven  cents  per  bushel ;  on  beef 
and  pork,  but  two  cents  a  pound ;  and  cheese,  but  two  and  a  quarter 
cents.  This  will  not  be  much  over  twenty  per  cent,  on  the  whole  of 
them,  and  some  calculators  have  been  enabled  to  push  her  average  duties 
higher  on  articles  which  we  raise  only  by  including  tobacco, —  which  is 
taxed  high  there  as  a  luxury,  and  to  bear  on  the  rich, —  and  some  other 
articles,  such  as  spirits  and  cider,  which  could  not  fairly  be  taken  into 
the  account,  we  ship  so  little  of  them  to  England,  any  more  than  cot- 
ton cloths,  though  only  taxed  fifteen  per  cent. ;  woollens,  but  ten  per 
cent. ;  linen,  fifteen  per  cent. ;  and  iron,  but  eight  per  cent. 

Embracing  corn,  and  their  higher  duty  on  our  direct  export  of  it  to 
England,  the  average  rate  on  the  first  class  of  articles  would  not  rise 
to  twenty-five  per  cent.,  as  wheat,  at  the  average  price  there,  pays 
only  about  thirty  or  thirty-two  per  cent,  duty,  ranging  lower  or  higher 
by  a  sliding  scale,  as  the  price  there  may  rise  or  fall.  To  show  what 
great  advances  she  has  recently  made  in  relaxing  her  restrictive  policy 
by  reducing  her  duties  on  articles  which  were  high,  and  many  of  which 
greatly  interest  us,  I  have  her  old  and  new  tariffs  before  me,  and  have 


dUFOR-' 


TARIFF.  331 

placed  several  instances  in  parallel  columns,  for  convenience  in  refer- 
ence, if  any  senator  chooses  to  examine  the  matter  further.  (See 
Table  14.)* 

Perhaps  one  reason,  among  others,  why  the  corn  duties  have  not 
been  more  relaxed,  is  the  continued  high  discrimination  which  we  still 
persist  in  against  manufactured  articles  such  as  she  produces.  And, 
as  those  duties  there  are  a  great  engine  of  wrong  and  suffering  towards 
starving  millions,  and  help  to  fill  her  almshouses  and  prisons, —  lead- 
ing to  barn-burning,  and  mobs,  and  thefts,  for  vengeance  or  existence, 
—  there  is  little  doubt  that  a  relaxation  there  is  desirable  to  many 
others  as  well  as  the  toiling  millions,  and  that  reciprocal  legislation  by 
us,  in  the  spirit  of  her  last  tariff,  would  help  to  hasten  a  further  reduc- 
tion, and  open  a  much  larger  vent  for  our  grain  and  meats,  at  enhanced 
prices.  A  reciprocal  arrangement  of  such  a  character  can  be  effected 
by  legislation  as  well,  if  not  better,  than  by  treaty.  The  two  countries 
are,  in  truth,  fitted  to  consume  largely  of  each  other's  surplus,  sold  by 
each  (as  it  is),  at  cheaper  rates  than  it  can  be  produced  by  the  other, — 
she  selling  her  manufactures  of  cotton  cheaper,  by  machinery,  skill, 
capital,  and  low  wages ;  we,  our  cotton,  grain,  meats,  and  other  mate- 
rials, cheaper  than  hers,  in  consequence  of  a  soil  costing  less  and 
producing  more,  as  well  as  being  more  lightly  taxed.  Nature  and 
circumstances  fit  us  both  for  mutual  interchanges,  on  mutual  low 
duties,  to  the  mutual  advantage  of  both,  as  much  as  do  the  tastes  and 
formation  of  the  two  sexes  suit  them  for  each  other's  happiness.  She 
needs,  even  on  the  present  limited  consumption,  near  two  million 
quarters  of  wheat  yearly  from  abroad.  This  alone  gives  a  market  for 
a  quantity  equal  to  the  sixteen  million  surplus  bushels  of  Ohio ;  and, 
if  we  supplied  the  whole,  though  at  the  reduced  price  of  one  dollar  and 
twenty-five  cents  per  bushel,  when  the  average  in  England  is  one 
dollar  and  seventy-five  cents,  it  would  be  a  gain  of  near  four  millions 
yearly.  But  the  quantity  consumed  would  be  greatly  increased  by  a 
reduction  in  the  duty  and  price.  The  quantity  taken  beyond  what 
is  now  taken,  beside  great  additions  to  the  meats,  might  reasonably  be 
estimated  at  forty  or  fifty  millions  of  bushels,  a  considerable  portion 
of  which  we  could  furnish,  as  well  as  the  north  of  Europe. 

[Mr.  Huntington  inquired  if  Mr.  W.  estimated  our  crop  of  grains 
at  only  fifty  millions  of  bushels,  or  stated  that  England  took  two- thirds 
of  it  all.] 

By  no  means,  sir.  The  whole  crop  exceeds  five  hundred  millions 
of  bushels,  including  all  the  grains,  and  exceeds  eighty-four  millions 
of  wheat  alone ;  and  England,  of  course,  takes  only  two-thirds  of  all 
we  send  abroad.  I  have  not  been  talking  of  a  market  abroad  for  all 
our  agricultural  productions, —  as  those  alone  equal  from  six  to  eight 
hundred  millions  of  dollars  yearly, — but  of  their  surplus.  Those  pro- 
ductions, after  supplying  the  wants  of  fifteen  or  sixteen  millions  of 
people  engaged  in  or  connected  with  the  production  of  them,  and  three 

*  Appendix,  R. 


382  TARIFF. 

or  four  millions  more  connected  with  commerce  and  other  pursuits, 
yield  a  surplus  of  near  one  hundred  millions  of  dollars  in  value ;  and, 
as  that  finds  abundant  and  high  markets  abroad,  or  otherwise,  it  affects 
the  sales  and  prices  of  all  which  is  transferred  from  producers  to  con- 
sumers at  home,  and  serves  to  enrich  or  impoverish  the  whole  country. 
The  present  tariff,  I  have  shown,  tends  to  drive  us  from  the  best 
foreign  markets  for  the  disposal  of  those  surplus  products ;  to  lessen 
the  number  of  those  markets,  as  well  as  their  demands,  by  provoking 
duties  against  us,  which  are  higher,  and  more  embarrassing  and  inju- 
rious, by  way  of  retaliation.  It  tends  to  injure  us  not  only  in  Eng- 
land and  France,  but  in  Germany  also,  where  the  tariff  usually  does 
not  exceed  twenty  per  cent.,  and  in  Prussia  is  intended  to  be  kept  down 
still  lower;  and  where,  as  in  South  America  and  Asia, —  great  and 
growing  markets  for  many  of  our  productions, —  the  imposts  are  light 
compared  with  our  own. 

Doing  all  we  can  by  negotiation  to  correct  inequalities  against  us 
elsewhere,  let  us,  then,  in  the  true  and  redeeming  spirit  of  morals  and 
sound  legislation,  proceed  to  do  right  ourselves  in  respect  to  the  tariff, 
to  set  a  good  example  of  revenue  duties,  and  then  urge  with  effect,  as 
we  may,  in  England  and  Erance  no  less  than  Germany,  a  reciprocal 
liberality  in  all  such  cases  as  are  not  now  mutual,  or  are  not  precluded 
by  a  local  policy  as  to  luxuries. 

But  if  other  nations  should  not  at  once  meet  our  reduction  in  duties 
by  corresponding  ones  on  their  part,  we  shall  still,  though  ill  requited 
by  foreigners,  be  gainers  from  our  own  moderation,  under  the  great 
principle  that  all  consumers  here  will,  by  our  reduction,  pay  less  for 
what  they  buy  from  abroad ;  and  the  producers  here  will  be  better  able 
to  compete  with  others  in  the  markets  of  the  whole  world,  and  will  sell 
more,  and  will  make  more  money  on  what  they  do  sell,  as  the  produc- 
tion of  it  here,  under  lower  duties  on  all  they  consume,  will  cost  them 
less. 

The  only  rainbow  which  now  tinges  the  gloom  is  the  hope  that  the 
tariff  of  1842  may  become  in  this  way  mitigated,  if  not  abandoned 
here,  and  then  still  more  abroad ;  and  that  improved  foreign  markets 
will  be  thus  encouraged  in  Europe  and  South  America,  cooperating 
with  the  vast  one  just  forced  open  in  China,  under  a  duty  not  ranging 
there,  on  an  average,  so  high  as  twenty  per  cent.,  and  through  which 
alone  we  may  be  able  to  aid  more  in  supplying  a  population,  equal  to 
half  that  of  the  whole  human  race,  with  whatever  our  mines  or  man- 
ufactures or  agriculture  can  furnish,  agreeable  to  their  taste  or  suitable 
to  their  wants. 

And  what,  sir,  is  offered  in  reply  to  all  the  dangers  and  losses  a 
perseverance  in  this  system  exposes  us  to  in  our  greatest  foreign  mar- 
kets in  Europe  ?  A  new  and  better  home  market,  instead  of  them. 
This  is  another  of  the  plausible  and  deluding  positions  that  reconcile 
many  to  the  restrictive  system,  but  which  cannot  stand  the  test  of 
scrutiny  or  facts.     There  is  a  charm  to  the  hearts  of  all  in  the  word 


TARIFF.  333 

"home."  But  do  not  the  articles  of  comfort  and  necessity  we  procure 
abroad  from  all  regions  help  to  increase  the  charm  of  home,  as  well  as 
what  we  raise  or  make  nearer? — the  tea  and  coffee  we  drink  from  the 
Indies?  the  sugar  we  eat  from  Brazil?  the  clothes,  and  salt,  and  iron, 
we  use  from  Europe  ?  Are  they  from  all  climes  not  procured  by 
means  of  our  labors  at  home,  as  well  as  the  other  articles  we  buy,  that 
are  made  here?  But,  in  an  economical  or  pecuniary  view,  it  is 
reiterated,  again  and  again,  that  the  home  market  is  the  best,  and  an 
ample  substitute  for  others.  Can  gentlemen  dwell  on  this,  when  so 
vast  a  quantity  of  our  productions,  consumed  at  home,  is  never  sold, 
but  used  by  those  raising  or  making  them  ?  Think  you  that,  for  the 
rest,  which  the  producers  may  desire  to  exchange  or  sell,  the  home 
market  of  one  or  two  millions  of  people  only,  connected  with  manufac- 
tures, is  as  great  as  that  abroad,  of  near  eight  hundred  millions, 
circling,  as  our  commerce  does,  with  that  surplus,  to  every  zone  and 
every  sea, — and  better  and  better  still  as  would  become  the  foreign 
markets,  if  we  only  encouraged  more  and  more  the  principles  of  a  freer 
trade  with  them  ?  Recollect,  too,  that  the  home  market  is  and  always 
has  been  first  supplied ;  but  still  it  has  proved,  and  always  will  prove, 
to  be  utterly  insufficient  for  all  we  raise.  Instead  of  being  the  best 
market  for  our  surplus  of  a  hundred  millions  yearly,  it  is  no  market 
at  all  for  it ;  and,  but  for  the  foreign  markets,  the  whole  would  perish 
on  our  hands ;  or  the  industry  of  the  country  could  become  so 
paralyzed  as  not  to  produce  it,  and  obtain  all  the  necessaries  and  com- 
forts it  brings  back  in  return,  and  showers  over  every  fireside.  So 
far  from  the  home  market  being  a  substitute  for  the  foreign  for  all 
these  vast  surplus  productions,  it  is  filled  and  glutted,  and  can  take 
no  more  of  them  before  they  become  a  surplus.  That  position,  then, 
is  entirely  indefensible.  Others  talk  of  the  near  exchanges  in  the 
home  market  being  much  more  profitable  to  the  producer.  But  how 
is  the  fact  ?  He  may,  to  be  sure,  quickly  exchange  a  bushel  of  wheat 
with  a  neighboring  manufacturer  for  a  shovel,  each  valued  at  a  dollar. 
But  if,  in  the  freer  trade  and  more  open  market  abroad,  under  a  low 
duty,  the  shovel,  equally  good,  could  be  bought  for  eighty  cents,  — 
taking  off  half  the  present  average  forty  per  cent,  duty,  —  and  his 
wheat  sold  twenty  per  cent,  higher,  or  at  a  dollar  and  a  fifth,  will  he 
not  be  forty  cents  better  under  the  low  duty  ?  And  after  all  the 
freight  and  charges,  though  equalling  half  the  difference,  if  the  village 
merchant  performs  both  of  these  operations  for  him,  and  takes  his 
wheat  and  lets  him  have  the  shovel  as  quick  as  the  manufacturer 
could,  is  he  not  still  a  gainer  of  twenty  cents  on  a  dollar  ?  and  are  not 
all  the  great  channels,  and  means,  and  instruments  of  commerce,  at 
the  same  time,  more  employed  and  invigorated  by  more  freights? 
But  others  may  argue  that,  by  means  of  the  restrictive  system,  man- 
ufacturers will  increase  so  much  faster  than  farmers  that  the  home 
market  for  domestic  produce  will  enlarge  so  as  speedily  to  consume  all 
the  usual  surplus,  though  it  will  be  at  a  lower  price,  probably,  and 


334  TARIFF. 

furnishing  manufactured  fabrics  at  a  higher  price,  as  before  shown,  if 
a  high  duty  is  continued  as  necessary  to  protect  them.  But  every 
one  who  scrutinizes  our  commercial  records  knows  that  experience 
teaches  just  the  reverse  of  this.  The  surplus  productions,  that  the 
home  market  cannot  purchase  and  consume,  have  increased,  rather 
than  diminished,  since  this  restrictive  system  was  in  force.  Under  it, 
instead  of  its  becoming  less  necessary  to  go  abroad,  it  has  become 
more  necessary.  In  a  country  with  such  immense  quantities  of  fertile 
land  at  low  prices,  the  agricultural  productions  increase  faster,  far, 
than  the  manufactures ;  and  every  addition  to  our  agricultural  popu- 
lation, which  is  made  at  the  rate  of  four  per  cent,  yearly,  augments, 
rather  than  diminishes,  the  surplus,  as  each  new  member  of  society 
here,  instead  of  being,  as  in  some  countries,  a  new  burden,  and  eating 
up  a  part  of  what  the  others  have,  or  need,  becomes  a  producer,  and, 
ere  long,  adds  yearly  to  the  common  income  much  more,  on  an 
average,  than  he  consumes.  Gentlemen  seem  blind  to  this  beautiful 
and  encouraging  peculiarity  in  our  national  position,  and  which  should 
justly  render  our  country  long  a  real  asylum  for  the  famished  of  all 
nations  ;  and  they  find  it  difficult  to  get  rid  of  European  and  Asiatic 
ideas,  where  agriculture  is  stationary,  and  every  new  birth  tends  to 
produce  scarcity  and  suffering.  Look  at  the  official  figures  in  con- 
nection with  these  supposed  facts.  In  1816,  by  imposing  higher 
duties,  we  were  assured  that  an  additional  and  better  home  market 
would  speedily  be  created  by  an  increase  in  manufactures,  and  all  our 
surplus  productions  would  be  consumed  here,  and  profitably,  and  the 
country  become  independent  of  foreign  markets,  and  of  the  pauper 
labor  of  Europe.  How  has  this  prediction  been  verified?  So  far 
from  happening,  in  the  next  eight  years,  ruin  overspread  the  country, 
and  the  home  market  utterly  failed  as  to  our  surplus.  Again :  the 
duties,  in  1824,  were  raised  still  higher,  with  a  promise  that  the  hope 
would  then  be  fulfilled,  under  great  additions  to  our  manufactures. 
They  were  said  to  be  on  the  eve  of  taking  root.  But,  in  only  four 
short  years,  again  disappointed  in  the  growth  and  sufficiency  of  the 
home  market,  came  the  higher  tariff  of  1828  ;  and  again  in  1842,  to 
run  another  disappointing  round,  comes  a  tariff  still  higher  than  that 
of  1828.  In  the  mean  time,  to  test,  by  the  actual  official  figures,  how 
poorly  the  home  market  has  grown  in  a  whole  quarter  of  a  century,  so 
as  to  absorb  all  or  most  of  our  surplus,  it  appears  that  this  surplus, 
now  required  to  be  exported  or  to  rot  on  our  hands,  is  near  a  hundred 
per  cent,  more  than  it  was  twenty  years  ago ;  and,  as  before  shown, 
the  aggregate  of  it  exported  during  the  last  ten  years  is  more  than 
double  what  the  aggregate  was  in  the  previous  ten.  Even  during  the 
greatest  height  of  the  duties,  it  appears,  by  the  tables  used  on  the 
other  side,  from  1821  to  1832,  —  the  period  when  the  duties  began 
to  be  reduced,  —  the  surplus,  instead  of  being  more  and  more  used  up 
here  and  purchased  in  the  home  market,  increased  from  $43,671,894 
to  $63,137,470  —about  fifty  per  cent. 


TARIFF.  385 

At  this  rate  of  progress  in  the  home  market  (taking  off  all  our 
surplus),  it  would  not  be  effected  till  doomsday;  and,  indeed,  would 
yearly  grow  worse  and  worse,  instead  of  better  and  better.  But  if 
any  senator  supposes  that  it  is  possible,  under  this  new  and  higher 
tariff,  in  the  face  of  these  recorded  facts,  to  tempt  so  many  more  into 
manufacturing  as  to  augment  their  demand  somewhat  faster  and  check 
somewhat  the  production,  what,  in  the  mean  time,  is  to  become  even 
of  the  reduced  surplus  and  the  owners  of  it,  till  the  whole  is  yearly 
absorbed  ?  And  what  but  ruin  —  widespread  and  inevitable  ruin  — 
must  gradually  overshadow  and  overwhelm  the  whole  of  them?  No, 
sir.  Our  reason,  our  experience,  our  common  sense,  when  applied  to 
this  novel  condition,  show  that,  beyond  all  the  home  market  can  take, 
a  surplus  from  agriculture  will,  on  the  contrary,  grow  as  our  settle- 
ments grow ;  and  more  and  more  need  foreign  markets,  till  our  people, 
if  remaining  free  and  united,  cover  the  spaces  between  the  Mississippi 
and  the  Rocky  Mountains,  and  thence  to  the  Pacific,  moving  westward, 
as  a  branch  of  the  Caucasian  race,  to  the  furthest  limits  of  the  globe. 
Saying  nothing  now  of  Texas  or  Canada,  this  growth  in  agriculture 
will  never  halt  till  a  denser  population,  and  older  skill,  and  greater 
capital,  divert  a  larger  proportion  profitably  and  naturally  to  such 
manufactures  as  can  flourish  here  without  artificial  stimulus.  Let  me 
entreat  gentlemen  not  to  overlook  these  unerring  indications  of  the 
present  utter  insufficiency  of  the  home  market,  because  we  happen  to 
do  what  is  so  much  relied  on  in  this  debate  —  consume  a  hundred 
thousand  bales  of  cotton  more  than  we  did  ten  years  ago.  Can  they 
forget  that  we  produce  probably  a  million  more  bales  than  we  did  ten 
years  ago,  or  as  much  in  all  as  it  was  then  estimated  was  grown  in 
the  whole  world  ?  And  what  is  to  become  of  the  additional  nine  hun- 
dred thousand  bales  beyond  all  the  larger  home  market  takes,  unless  it 
is  sent  abroad  ?  And  do  they  not  see,  by  the  very  last  arrivals,  that 
England,  in  a  single  year,  has  bought  and  consumed  half  as  much 
more  of  our  cotton  as  the  whole  wants  of  our  home  market  ?  Even 
France  consumes  fifty  per  cent,  more  of  our  cotton  than  all  our  home 
market;  though,  in  1831,  the  manufacturers  themselves  estimated  that 
we  then  used  as  much  of  it  as  she  did.  Hence,  in  point  of  fact,  the 
French  market  alone,  beside  the  greater  increase  in  England,  has  far 
outstripped,  in  its  demands  and  wants  of  this  article,  all  our  boasted 
home  market. 

But  if  we  were  generally  to  compare  markets  for  raw  cotton,  —  the 
home  and  the  foreign,  —  when,  in  fact,  it  is  not  a  comparison,  but  a 
clear  gain  of  all  the  foreign  ones,  what  is  the  result  ?  The  foreign 
took,  last  year,  two  million  two  hundred  thousand  bales,  to  only 
about  three  hundred  thousand  consumed  at  home,  —  or  more  than 
seven  times  as  much ;  and  the  greater  demands  of  England  alone  are 
such,  that  she  makes  two  hundred  and  fifty  millions'  worth  yearly  of 
cotton  fabrics  to  our  forty-seven  and  a  half  millions,  or  five  hundred 
per  cent.  more. 


336  TARIFF. 

A  senator  on  the  other  side  has  talked  of  the  great  home  market  of 
England  for  her  own  manufactures,  and  has  held  it  up  as  an  example 
to  us.  But  does  he  not  know  that,  after  supplying  all  her  home 
market,  she  has  a  surplus  of  manufactures,  for  which  she  must  and 
does  find  other  markets  in  her  foreign  possessions  or  in  foreign  coun- 
tries, and  large  and  numerous  ones,  or  she  would  not  live  unprostrated 
a  single  year  1  She  exports  from  two  hundred  to  two  hundred  and 
thirty  millions  of  dollars  a  year  of  surplus  manufactures,  beyond  all 
her  home  market,  independent  of  other  domestic  productions,  equal  to 
near  seventy  million  dollars  more.  All  this  immense  sum  would 
become  lost. — the  articles  valueless, — if  she  did  not  find  or  provide 
foreign  markets  for  it.  This  is,  in  truth,  as  to  principle,  the  example 
that  should  be  held  up  for  us. 

She  has  negotiated,  and  colonized,  and  fought,  for  a  century  or 
more,  to  extend  the  foreign  markets,  to  consume  her  products ;  and, 
without  those  markets,  would  have  continued  what  she  before  was, — a 
second  or  third  rate  power  in  Europe, — or  would  long  since  have  sunk 
under  her  wars  and  debt,  instead  of  being,  as  she  is  now,  the  prepon- 
derating power  in  the  world.  Assisted  by  those  markets,  she  has  been 
enabled  to  add  not  only  possession  after  possession  there,  but  in  Africa 
and  America ;  and  empire  after  empire  in  Asia  and  Australia,  until 
her  landed  capital  away  from  home  is  valued  at  more  than  half  its 
great  amount  there,  and  her  tributary  population  away  is  more  than 
tenfold  the  rest ;  all  of  it  exceeding  one  hundred  and  eighty  millions. 
Thus,  while  the  annual  produce  of  Great  Britain  alone  is  only  about 
$2,500,000,000,  she  has  one  of  near  $4,400,000,000,  including  her 
dependencies  ;  and,  while  the  population  of  most  European  countries 
consume,  per  head,  only  about  two-thirds  of  a  shilling's  worth  of  her 
manufactures,  and  we  but  seventeen  shillings  per  head,  her  colonies  in 
America  consume  thirty-one  and  a  half  shillings'  worth  per  head, 
those  in  the  West  Indies  seventy-two,  and  those  of  British  origin  in 
Australia  two  hundred  and  thirty-five,  and  thus  indirectly  help  much 
to  build  up  and  sustain  her  vast  industry  at  home. 

What  we,  too,  would  have  been,  but  for  our  foreign  markets,  was 
forcibly  shadowed  forth  during  the  embargo  of  1808,  and  the  non- 
intercourse  in  1809,  and  in  a  remoter  degree  during  a  part  of  the  war 
of  1812.  All  those  measures  may  have  been  proper,  looking  to  high 
political  considerations ;  but  what  did  the  farmer  and  ship-owner  think 
of  the  blessings  and  excellences  of  a  home  market  alone,  during  the 
period  when  little  was  sent  abroad  1  For  many  years,  beside  England 
and  France  for  large  foreign  markets  for  our  greatest  staples,  what 
should  we  have  been  without  still  others, —  without  breaking  into  the 
formerly  prohibited  possessions  of  Spain  in  America,  without  a  more 
enlarged  intercourse  with  the  vast  empire  of  Brazil,  without  more 
extensive  markets  in  Germany,  and  our  vessels  exporting  our  products 
more  and  more  to  remotest  Asia  and  the  isles  of  the  Pacific  ?  Waiv- 
ing further  illustrations  on  this,  it  could  hardly  be  credited  that  the 


TARIFF.  33T 

protective  system  was  so  obstinately  adhered  to,  when  it  not  only 
tended  to  injure  all  foreign  markets,  and  throw  us  on  the  insufficient 
home  one,  but  to  drive  from  the  ocean  much  of  the  ships  and  navi- 
gators and  capital  engaged  in  transporting  these  surplus  productions 
to  those  markets  in  almost  every  region,  and  bringing  back,  in  return 
for  them,  the  spare  comforts  and  necessaries  of  every  other  people. 

The  injurious  influence  of  this  high  system  of  duties  on  our  whole 
navigation,  domestic  as  well  as  foreign,  was  capable  of  demonstration. 
It  had  often  been  boasted  of  as  an  antagonist  system  to  that  of  foreign 
trade ;  and  the  arguments  to  justify  it  had  been  not  only  such  as  we 
have  been  refuting,  but  that  the  navigating  interest,  as  a  whole,  would 
not  suffer,  if  cut  off  from  abroad,  in  a  considerable  degree,  because  the 
coasting  trade  would  be  so  much  more  augmented  as  to  make  up  for 
all  loss  in  that  which  was  foreign.  A  moment's  examination,  however, 
will  show  the  whole  of  this  to  be  equally  delusive  with  the  idea  that, 
by  a  high  tariff,  a  new  and  better  home  market  is  substituted  for  the 
foreign. 

In  the  first  place,  the  increased  duty  over  twenty  per  cent,  on  the 
imported  hemp,  iron  and  cordage,  which  enter  into  ship-building,  has 
been  carefully  computed  to  equal  at  least  five  dollars  a  ton.  This,  on 
our  whole  tonnage  of  2,092,360  tons,  would  be  an  additional  tax,  as  it 
is  repaired  and  rebuilt,  of  $10,461,800.  If  the  whole  is  renewed  in 
five  years,  on  an  average,  the  new  burden  would  equal  annually 
$2,092,900.  If  gentlemen  spread  the  renewal  over  more  years,  the 
proportion  is  only  varied.  Almost  half  of  this  tax  falls  on  the  tonnage 
engaged  in  foreign  *  trade,  and  the  rest  on  that  in  the  fisheries  and 
domestic  navigation.  There  is  no  difference  thus  far  in  favor  of  the 
latter;  while  the  former,  as  to  repairs,  can  sometimes  gain  a  little 
advantage  over  the  latter,  by  being  able  to  supply  sails  and  cables 
abroad  not  so  highly  taxed. 

To  show  the  force  of  this  new  burden  more  strongly  by  an  illustration 
on  a  smaller  scale,  readily  comprehended,  and  coming  nearer  home  to 
the  business  and  bosoms  of  my  constituents,  take  the  tonnage  of  New 
Hampshire,  which  is  mostly  confined  to  the  one  small  port  of  Portsmouth, 
whose  population  is  between  seven  and  eight  thousand.  Its  foreign 
tonnage  alone  is  about  fifteen  thousand,  on  which  five  dollars  increased 
duties  amounts  to  seventy-five  thousand  dollars ;  and  which,  spread 
over  five  years,  for  such  repairs  and  renewals  as  are  equal  to  its  present 
value,  would  be  yearly  about  two  dollars  per  head  for  the  whole  popu- 
lation of  that  town.  This  is  as  much  as  all  their  other  taxes  united. 
But,  in  the  next  stage  of  its  evil  operation,  it  falls  heavier  on  the  foreign 
than  the  domestic  trade ;  for  the  tonnage  in  that,  costing  more  than  it 
otherwise  would,  cannot  afford  to  carry  freights  so  low  as  it  otherwise 
might,  and  must  charge  higher  to  the  owner  of  the  produce  and  mer- 
chandise, and  thus  devolve  a  part  or  all  the  increased  tax  on  them,  or 
submit,  as  it  does  in  most  cases,  under  the  competition  of  vessels  from 
abroad,  not  so  highly  taxed,  to  carry  freights  at  the  old  or  a  still  lower 


338  TARIFF. 

price.  The  raiser  of  the  produce  might  be  pleased  to  find  transporta- 
tion cheaper,  if  effected  fairly,  and  in  free  and  equal  competition; 
but  must  regret  to  see  it  at  the  expense  of  the  navigator,  and  under  a 
system  of  vicious  legislation,  -which  makes  it  lower  virtually,  by  dis- 
criminating duties  against  our  own  citizens,  and  in  favor  of  foreigners. 

Let  our  own  citizens  in  honest  and  useful  pursuits  have,  at  least, 
an  equal  chance  with  others.  No  onerous  burdens, — an  open  sea,  a 
flowing  sail,  and  a  fair  fight,  in  industry  and  enterprise,  and  not  a 
novel  kind  of  navigation  act,  made  by  ourselves,  favorable  to  for- 
eigners, and  hostile  to  Americans.  The  day  for  great  exclusive  priv- 
ileges to  navigation  had  long  gone  by,  as  unnecessary,  both  in  this 
country  and  England ;  and  Cromwell's  famous  navigation  act,  however 
extolled  by  the  senator  from  Maine,  had,  in  the  time  of  it  and  since, 
been  regarded  by  many  as  impolitic,  and  had  virtually  been  abandoned 
in  England  the  last  twenty  years,  in  several  important  respects. 
Dutch  pride  had  been  humbled  by  Blake  before  it  passed,  and  Dutch 
prosperity  had  been  sapped  by  her  wars  and  high  taxes,  rather  than 
by  British  legislation.  It  would  be  idle  for  England  or  this  country, 
or  any  other  power,  ever  to  expect  durably  great  prosperity  by  legis- 
lation, however  full  of  bounties  or  restrictions,  unless  their  people  are 
islanders  or  fishermen,  or  have  natural  facilities  in  naval  stores  and 
harbors  for  extensive  commerce. 

Our  tonnage  has  seldom  been  more  flourishing,  except  during  the 
calamitous  wars  of  Europe,  than  under  our  low  duties,  most  of  the 
time,  from  1830  to  1840.  It  increased  ninety-five  per  cent.,  while 
the  English,  in  that  period,  our  great  rivals,  increased  but  forty-nine 
per  cent,,  and  the  French  only  fifty;  while  during  the  last  year  it 
has  declined  in  quantity,  besides  being  much  less  profitable.  By  the 
operation  of  high  restrictions,  the  exports,  too,  are  expected  to  be 
lessened,  through  an  increased  home  market.  The  system  has  natu- 
rally that  tendency,  in  conformity  with  its  design,  as  we  have  seen  in 
the  official  returns,  by  the  exports  proving  nearly  double  as  much, 
under  ten  years  of  falling  duties,  as  ten  of  high  ones.  But  the  boast, 
by  some,  that  if  it  cuts  off  agricultural  exports,  it  makes  and  substi- 
tutes as  many  manufactured  ones,  has  been  verified  very  badly ;  as, 
while  the  former,  in  ten  years,  has  added  twenty  millions,  the  latter 
has  added  but  two  or  three,  and  the  cotton  manufacture  only  half  a 
million.  The  foreign  imports  and  exports  are  intended  to  be  dimin- 
ished by  the  very  essence  of  the  system.  Especially  is  it  aimed  at 
the  imports,  intending  to  substitute  in  their  stead  domestic  products 
of  a  like  character.  Such,  too,  has  been  the  effect  of  it  here.  When 
it  got  into  full  operation  after  1818,  the  imports  began  to  fall  off;  and 
they  never  rose,  during  the  full  continuance  of  the  system  to  1833,  so 
high  again  as  in  that  year,  though  swollen  much,  from  time  to  time, 
by  the  foreign  loans  to  the  States,  brought  home  in  merchandise. 

Again :  under  its  operation  the  past  year,  the  imports  have  fallen, 
in  the  aggregate,  near  eleven  millions,  and  of  the  consumable  commod- 


TARIFF.  339 

ities,  and  such  as  pay  much  freight,  over  thirty  millions ;  there  being, 
I  understand,  near  twenty  millions  of  the  free  goods  this  year  in 
specie  over  and  above  the  quantity  in  1842,  and,  indeed,  over  what 
has  been  reexported  this  year.  Do  the  navigating  interest  lose  noth- 
ing by  this  reduced  quantity  and  value  of  the  imports  to  be  freighted, 
— considering,  also,  at  the  same  time,  that  the  whole  exports  in  1843 
have  become  less,  by  four  to  five  millions,  than  in  1842 1 

But,  while  the  tonnage  engaged  in  the  foreign  trade  is  undergoing 
this  loss  of  values  to  be  carried  both  ways  across  the  ocean,  beside  the 
still  greater  loss  in  reduced  prices  for  freights,  the  chairman  says  the 
inward  freights  have  been  better.  If  he  means,  by  that,  our  ships 
have  brought  home  a  larger  portion  of  all  imports  than  usual,  I  do  not 
see  anything  in  that  to  indicate  improvement ;  because  they  being  cut 
off,  by  a  high  tariff,  from  bringing  home  iron,  hemp,  etc.,  as  much  as 
usual,  have  been  glad,  rather  than  come  home  in  ballast,  to  take  any- 
thing at  little  profit. 

[Mr.  Evans  said  he  meant  that  the  price  of  freights  was  higher.] 

By  no  means,  generally.  For  where  thirty  or  forty  shillings  a  ton 
has  been  got  formerly  for  some  freights  from  Liverpool,  it  has,  I 
understand,  in  certain  cases,  in  1843,  been  brought  for  eight  shillings ; 
and  where  a  penny  per  pound  has  once  been  got  for  carrying  raw  cot- 
ton to  Europe,  half  a  penny  only  has  of  late  been  obtained  in  many 
cases,  and  a  hundred  vessels  are  now  probably  waiting  in  New  Orleans 
for  freights. 

But  how  fares  the  coasting  trade,  which  is  to  be  so  greatly  pro- 
moted by  such  a  tariff"?  The  owner  of  the  tonnage  in  that,  whether 
on  the  sea-board  or  our  inland  seas  and  mighty  rivers,  is,  to  be  sure, 
protected  from  foreign  competition.  But  he  must  suffer  to  the  whole 
extent  of  the  increased  cost  of  his  vessel,  and  carry  at  the  same  price 
for  freight  as  before ;  or,  if  he  raises  the  freight  so  as  to  indemnify  him- 
self, will  only  shift  a  large  burden  from  his  own  shoulders  to  those  of 
the  producer  or  consumer,  already  so  oppressed ;  and,  instead  of  any- 
body being  benefited  by  the  high  duty  except  the  manufacturer,  an 
additional  tax  falls  on  most,  if  not  all  others.  The  tax,  too,  reacts 
sometimes  on  the  hardy  ship-builder.  If  his  materials  cost  more  and 
he  can  sell  no  higher,  it  equals  from  a  million  to  three-fourths  a  year 
on  the  tonnage  built  in  1842 ;  and,  as  the  business  will  thus  diminish, 
must  extend  its  baleful  influences  to  the  lumber-man,  the  timber- 
grower,  and  all  the  mechanical  trades  engaged  in  ship-building  and 
repairs.  But  look  a  little  further  at  the  next  step  in  its  bad  conse- 
quences. 

How  is  the  remuneration  for  all  this  to  occur  in  the  increase  of  the 
domestic  tonnage?  Does  that,  as  is  estimated,  have  more  to  carry, 
and  further,  than  it  did  when  the  foreign  trade  was  larger  1  So  far 
from  it,  all  the  domestic  agricultural  produce  which  is  sold  at  New 
York,  Boston,  and  Providence,  is  brought  no  further  from  the  west 
or  south,  and  its  returns  are  carried  back  no  further,  than  if  the  addi- 


340  TARIFF. 

tional  consumption  supposed  to  be  caused  near  those  places  had  been 
transported  abroad,  or  the  additional  manufacturing  products  made 
near,  and  to  be  sent  back  to  the  south  or  west,  came  from  abroad. 
But  the  whole  foreign  freights  of  it,  and  all  the  persons  and  capital 
and  profits  of  true  American  origin  and  character  connected  therewith, 
are  frustrated,  and  the  nation  paralyzed,  not  only  in  one  of  its  great 
arms  of  industry  and  means  of  rearing  seamen  for  maritime  defence  in 
war,  but  nothing  whatever  gained  in  place  of  those  vital  losses  by  any 
enlargement  of  our  domestic  tonnage.  More,  sir.  As  the  system 
expands,  the  manufacture  is  calculated  to  spread  nearer  to  the  south 
and  west,  and  establishments  to  spring  up  on  the  slopes  of  the  Alle- 
ghanies,  and  many  of  the  tributaries  to  the  Mississippi  and  the  lakes. 
All  can  see  that,  as  these  approach  nearer  the  raw  materials  which 
they  consume, — whether  cotton,  corn,  flour,  meats,  or  other  articles, — 
the  domestic  transportation,  both  to  and  fro,  is  shortened,  and  requires 
less  time,  capital  and  employment  for  the  home  tonnage. 

Pray  tell  me,  then,  whether  the  effect  of  this  system  on  the  navigat- 
ing interest,  foreign  or  domestic,  be  not  highly  injurious,  an  unmiti- 
gated evil ;  and  what  there  possibly  can  be  in  it  to  atone  to  the  com- 
mercial classes  for  its  destructive  influences. 

The  constitution  itself  was  formed  chiefly  to  protect  our  foreign 
commerce ;  as  the  framers  of  it,  whether  farmers,  merchants,  or  plant- 
ers, saw  that  on  the  success  of  that  commerce  depended  the  value  of 
all  the  surplus  crops,  the  ease  and  cheapness  with  which  they  reached 
good  markets.  The  vessel  was  like  the  cart  and  wagon  to  hasten  the 
crop  onward  to  a  good  market ;  and  the  lower  the  cost  of  the  vessel, 
the  less  it  was  taxed,  and  the  more  markets  it  would  freely  resort  to, 
the  higher  would  be  the  prices  obtained  for  the  cargo,  and  more 
reduced  the  expense  of  getting  home  their  returns.  If  good  highways, 
bridges,  and  canals,  and  railroads,  are  a  public  blessing,  and  to  be 
sought  for  their  benefit  in  internal  commerce,  so  are  all  improvements 
by  steamboats,  faster  sailing  vessels,  cheaper  building,  and  lower 
duties,  and  less  vexatious  regulations, — equal  blessings  to  the  producer 
and  consumer,  no  less  than  to  the  navigator.  The  blow  struck,  then, 
by  this  restrictive  system  to  the  commerce  of  the  country,  whose  num- 
bers and  capital  are  nearly  as  large,  if  not  larger,  than  those  of  the 
manufacturers,  and  a  very  valuable  and  useful  and  indeed  national 
interest,  in  the  view  of  the  framers  of  the  constitution,  is  a  blow  fall- 
ing, at  the  same  time,  with  as  much,  if  not  greater  force,  on  all  the 
producers  and  consumers  of  the  country. 

The  hardy  and  adventurous  fisherman  feels  it  the  most,  both  as 
navigator  and  producer  of  a  new  article  of  food.  He  gets  no  addi- 
tional drawback  or  bounty  on  account  of  the  higher  duties  and  greater 
cost  of  his  vessel,  and  has  to  sustain  the  shock  after  a  considerable 
depression  in  the  prosperity  of  his  business.  Computing  the  whole 
tonnage  in  the  fisheries  at  210,000,  the  loss  on  that,  in  a  few  years, 
must  be  equal  to  $1,050,000,  while  the  exports  of  dried  fish  (his 


TARIFF.  341 

gains  as  a  producer)  have  almost  ceased,  and  the  whole  business  in 
whaling  suffered  rivalship  and  loss  from  the  manufacture  of  lard  oil. 

If  the  hog,  then,  is  painted  in  the  west  as  devouring  the  whale, 
and  if  the  white  fish  of  the  lakes  are  transported  to  the  east,  and  sold 
even  in  sight  of  the  flakes  of  our  coast,  as  has  happened  the  last  sea- 
son, so  be  it,  if  the  result  of  equal  laws  and  fair  competition.  But  do 
not  neglect  or  oppress  that  class  whose  numbers,  though  so  noiseless, 
exceed  all  in  the  cotton  manufactures  of  the  whole  Union ;  and  were 
deemed  so  national  an  object  by  our  fathers,  forming  a  nursery  not 
only  for  our  commercial  marine,  but  our  gallant  navy,  and  who  aided 
so  ably  in  the  capture  of  Louisburg  (under  a  commander  whose  tomb 
and  dwelling-house  are  near  the  mouth  of  the  chief  harbor  of  my 
State) ;  and  even  mingled  with  Rodgers'  rangers,  and  helped  to  con- 
quer Quebec ;  and  poured  out  their  blood  like  water  on  the  decks  of 
Paul  Jones,  in  the  Revolution,  as  well  as  in  the  hardest  sea-fights  of 
Hull,  Bainbridge  and  Decatur,  in  the  late  war.  Rely  on  it,  sir, 
always,  in  all  exigencies,  will  they  be  found  at  their  posts ;  and  will 
compare  in  morals  and  worth,  no  less  than  daring  courage,  with  any 
class  of  the  north.  The  policy  of  England,  on  the  contrary,  has  been 
to  continue  carefully  to  cherish  her  fisheries,  as  well  as  navigation. 
Her  annual  income  from  this  source  is  computed  at  twenty  millions  of 
dollars ;  while  ours,  at  only  half  that,  and  under  depression,  was  to  be 
further  prostrated  by  the  renewal  of  this  restrictive  policy.  England, 
also,  so  far  from  increasing  the  burdens  on  her  navigation,  when 
embarrassed,  has  sought  out  new  markets  for  it  to  visit,  new  prod- 
ucts to  be  carried,  and  lowered  the  duties  on  all  it  consumes.  Hence 
her  tariff  on  hemp  was  low,  and  had  been  reduced, — on  timber  a  trifle 
if  from  her  colonies,  and  on  iron  merely  nominal. 

But,  beyond  all  this,  the  policy  of  our  present  tariff  aimed  at  the 
destruction  of  the  reciprocal  treaties  we  possessed  as  to  tonnage ;  and, 
in  that  way,  would  destroy  the  noblest  carrying  trade  of  the  world.  It 
breathed  hostility  to  everything  savoring  of  free  trade,  because  a 
standing  censure  on  their  discriminating  course.  These  treaties  had 
already  been  threatened  again  and  again,  though  without  them  we 
could  claim  no  transportation  of  anything  but  exports  of  our  own  pro- 
ductions, as  all  other  nations  had  a  like  right  to  carry  the  export  of 
theirs.  This  would  give  us,  in  practice,  only  half  the  freights  of  all 
our  exports  and  imports,  and  half  the  number  of  ships  or  tonnage 
engaged  in  our  foreign  trade.  Many  seem  to  believe  we  do  not  pos- 
sess so  great  a  proportion  as  that  now,  and  a  change  is  called  for  by 
the  opponents  of  free  trade  ;  and  a  hue  and  cry  is  raised,  that  most  of 
our  foreign  commerce  is  in  foreign  bottoms ;  and  that  English  naviga- 
tion, in  particular,  is  yearly  crowding  us  from  the  ocean.  But  how 
is  the  naked  truth  ?  and  what  are  the  losses  and  dangers  the  restrict- 
ive system  is  exposing  us  to  ?  Setting  aside  the  colonial  intercourse 
between  us  and  the  British  provinces  (which  rests  on  peculiar  princi- 
ples, and,  by  frequent  entries  and  clearances  with  passengers  and 
29* 


342  TARIFF. 

steamboats,  and  little  freight,  has  a  fallacious  appearance  as  to  entries, 
though,  in  fact,  we  carry  three-fourths  of  the  freights),  the  American 
tonnage  entering  and  clearing  abroad  is  nearly  treble  in  quantity  that 
of  all  the  rest  of  the  world  ;  and  the  freights  we  brought  home  were, 
in  1842,  valued  to  the  extent  of  $88,724,280;  and  all  others  only 
$11,437,807.  Those  we  carried  out  were  quite  three-fourths.  These 
are  near  the  proportions  for  some  years.  Who,  after  so  many  state- 
ments to  the  contrary,  can  look  but  with  amazement  on  the  compari- 
sons in  the  table  in  my  hands,  compiled  from  official  returns,  of  the 
greater  number  of  entries  by  American  than  foreign  vessels,  from  each 
of  the  great  powers  in  the  world,  in  1842,  as  well  as  most  of  the 
smaller  ones,  except  two,  and  think  what  must  be  the  tendency  of  a 
system  which  would  exchange  this  four-fifths  for  only  half  of  the  trade  1 
(See  Table  No.  15.)* 

We,  from  all  the  world,  except  the  British  colonies,  had  4259  ves- 
sels entering  here,  and  all  other  powers  but  916  :  we,  from  England 
herself,  614 ;  she,  and  all  other  foreigners  thence  to  us,  but  370  :  we, 
from  France,  406  vessels,  and  all  others  thence  but  74 :  we,  from 
Spain,  1500,  of  which  two-thirds  were  from  Cuba ;  to  all  others,  82  : 
we,  even  from  Brazil,  about  which  so  much  has  been  said,  174  ;  and 
all  others  but  26.  And,  indeed,  in  all  quarters  of  the  globe,  there  are 
only  two  small  governments  —  Sweden  and  the  Hanse  Towns  —  in 
which  the  balance  is  against  us,  and  that  balance,  in  both  of  them  inclu- 
sive, not  so  much  as  it  is  in  our  favor  with  the  small  republic  of  Texas, 
in  our  own  neighborhood.  Yet  those  two  trifling  exceptions  are  often 
inconsiderately  thrust  forward  as  conclusive  evidence  of  the  general 
operation  of  the  reciprocal  system  on  our  foreign  tonnage.  Leaving 
other  interesting  details,  I  would  only  add,  that  another  evil  conse- 
quence from  annulling  the  reciprocity  system  would  be  to  destroy  the 
whole  of  our  carriage  of  all  the  ten  to  twenty  millions  which  we 
yearly  export  of  articles  of  foreign  origin.  Besides  this,  it  will  cut 
off  a  profitable  and  large  branch  of  the  carrying  trade,  nothing  of 
which  appears  on  our  official  records.  It  is  of  this  character.  Prob- 
ably 100  to  150  American  vessels  clear  yearly,  from  Cuba  to  various 
parts  of  the  world,  with  sugar,  molasses,  and  coffee,  whose  cargoes 
make  no  part  of  our  commercial  statistics.  Many  more  clear  also 
from  Brazil,  and  some  from  various  other  ports  in  both  hemispheres, 
with  cargoes  for  various  quarters,  of  which  we  learn  nothing,  except 
by  foreign  statistics  and  consular  returns,  or  by  the  profits  at  some 
future  period  brought  home  in  valuable  imports.  Something  like 
thirty  of  our  vessels  have  yearly  gone  with  freights  to  those  very  Hanse 
Towns ;  some  to  Antwerp  and  Trieste,  and  others  still  to  other  ports 
in  the  Baltic,  from  Brazil  and  Cuba,  who,  without  the  principle  of  our 
reciprocal  treaties,  could  not  thus  carry  a  ton  of  foreign  produce.  Let 
the  northern  ship-owner,  then,  look  to  consequences,  before  he  longer 
approves  a  policy  likely  to  end  in  the  destruction  of  much  of  this  supe- 

*  Appendix,  S. 


TARIFF.  343 

riority  on  our  part,  in  the  indirect  as  well  as  direct  carrying  trade,  and 
in  a  commercial  marine  second  only  to  one  power  in  the  known 
world. 

Let  the  farmer  of  the  mammoth  west  and  of  the  central  States  look 
to  this,  and  the  manufacturer,  as  well  as  the  navigator,  of  the  north. 
Why,  sir  ?  Because  this  very  trade,  which  makes  a  market  for  bread- 
stuffs,  lard,  fish,  and  most  of  our  exported  manufactures,  in  Cuba,  Mex- 
ico, and  Brazil,  does  it  only  because  the  sugar,  coffee,  and  molasses, 
obtained  in  exchange,  have  been,  in  a  great  degree,  shipped  to  the  north 
of  Europe,  and  their  proceeds  returned  here  in  those  very  articles  of 
foreign  iron  and  hemp  which  the  present  tariff  and  its  anti-commercial 
policy  tend  to  reject. 

I  hasten  to  the  last  consideration  intended  to  be  urged  on  this  occa- 
sion, which  is,  that  a  tariff  like  this  is  not  founded  on  a  policy  likely 
to  be  useful  permanently  to  the  true  manufacturing  industry  of  the 
country.  What  that  branch  of  industry  really  needs  is  a  natural 
adaptation  in  the  climate,  raw  material,  or  mines  of  the  country,  to 
aid  the  particular  business  pursued ;  and  a  steady,  durable,  incidental 
protection,  by  collecting,  on  revenue  principles,  a  suitable  portion  of 
revenue  from  imports.  This,  too,  had  better  be  moderate  and  dura- 
ble, with  equal  regard  to  all  interests,  than  high  and  vacillating  under 
party  excitement.  It  had  better,  even  for  the  manufacturer,  be  inci- 
dental to  a  clear  revenue  power  and  practice,  than  direct  and  high  in 
the  exercise  of  a  protective  power  of  doubtful  character ;  and  had  better 
be  equal  to  all  interests,  as  well  as  manufactures,  so  far  as  incident  to 
a  just  impost  on  imports,  than  be  unequal,  and  thus  exposed  to  changes 
and  unpopularity,  as  partial  on  the  one  hand,  and  oppressive  on  the 
other.  Such  a  moderate  and  stable  protection  as  this  to  manufactures 
I  never  shall  resist,  any  more  than  did  our  fathers  in  their  early  tariffs, 
raising  all  their  revenue  in  that  manner  (rather  than  by  direct  taxes) 
which  they  needed  and  could  obtain,  without  going  above  the  revenue 
standard,  and  thereby  injuring  commerce,  agriculture,  and  other  great 
interests.  Manufactures,  under  that  system,  flourished  wherever  the 
country  was  fitted  for  them ;  and  the  sagacity  of  such  men  as  Frank- 
lin and  Jefferson  saw  that  they  would  continue  to  grow,  if  lucrative, 
considering  our  state  of  society ;  and  that  they  would  succeed  best,  not 
by  unnatural  but  natural  aid,  and  would  push  forward  steadiest,  under 
their  own  enterprise  and  vigor,  by  moderate  duties,  and  the  wants  of 
the  country,  rather  than  by  being  driven  ahead  of  them  by  forced 
marches  under  legislative  favor.  They  did  not  follow  the  shiftless  sys- 
tem of  running  to  the  government  for  everything,  any  more  than  did 
the  farmers,  lawyers,  or  doctors,  any  of  whom,  when  in  trouble,  might 
as  well  ask  public  legislation  to  assist  them.  On  the  contrary,  the 
reliance  of  all  men  should  be  on  their  own  energies  and  skill,  and  local 
advantages,  looking  —  as  Sir  Robert  Peel  at  last  sensibly  advises  the 
Tamworth  farmers  to  do,  after  experiencing  the  evils  of  a  different 
course  —  more  to  their  manures,  and  less  to  government. 


344  TARIFF. 

Even  in  1791,  many  of  the  manufacturers  (and  especially  the 
household  ones)  had  acquired  a  strong  foothold  among  our  people. 
They  were  enabled  to  supply  nearly  as  large  a  proportion  of  our  wants 
then,  in  cottons,  woollens,  soap,  cabinet-work,  potters'  ware,  paper,  oils, 
candles,  &c,  as  they  do  now. 

Mr.  Dallas,  also,  in  1816,  considered  many  manufactures  as  fully 
established, —  woollens,  cottons,  and  linen,  in  some  districts,  supplying 
"  two-thirds,  three-fourths,  and  even  four-fifths,"  of  their  wants.  But 
after  the  war  and  individual  enterprise  had  multiplied  great  corporate 
establishments  for  making  cottons  and  woollens,  which  had  not  pre- 
viously been  so  thrifty,  the  system  of  direct  protection  was  demanded 
and  acquiesced  in  for  a  temporary  object,  to  break  the  fall,  or  make  the 
transition  easier  to  a  state  of  peace,  but  under  a  strong  expectation 
that  its  continuance  would  be  limited  and  temporary.  The  history  of 
its  influence  since,  even  on  many  manufactures,  is  well  known  to  have 
developed  many  mischiefs.  First,  it  has  been  very  fluctuating ;  the 
high  protection  and  large  profits  at  first  tempting  too  much  capital  and 
too  prematurely  into  such  business,  and  thus  soon  reducing  profits, 
and  leading  to  clamorous  demands  for  duties  still  higher ;  and  then,  in. 
hundreds  of  instances  of  the  finer  branches  of  manufactures,  after  a 
series  of  additional  protections,  becoming  inflated,  till  the  bubble  burst, 
and  deplorable  bankruptcies  followed.  It  was  a  kind  of  intemperate 
excitement,  that  only  required,  in  time,  additional  stimulants,  till 
means  and  patience  were  exhausted,  and  the  patient  sunk;  while 
other  manufacturers,  not  brought  into  being  that  way,  and  a  few  of 
those  with  agents  of  great  foresight  and  skill,  managed  so  as  to  con- 
tinue through  every  revulsion,  and  yield  fair  profits.  These  last  would 
continue  to  do  the  same  under  a  revenue  tariff,  with  the  aid  of  its  steady 
and  durable  incidental  protection.  In  the  next  place,  all  can  see  that, 
if  the  increased  duty  makes  the  manufacture  very  profitable,  it  may 
soon  become  a  political  hobby  to  sustain  or  enlarge  it,  in  order  to  grat- 
ify those  interested.  Or,  if  speculative  rather  than  political  manufac- 
turing mingles  with  honest  enterprise  in  procuring  for  it  additional 
protection,  a  sale  of  the  stock  is  made  before  a  large  diversion  of  cap- 
ital and  persons  into  this  most  profitable  employment  takes  place,  and 
reduces  the  income  lower  than  the  general  standard,  and  often  throws 
the  loss,  as  in  the  mania  about  merino  sheep  and  moras  multicaulis,  on 
unsuspecting  purchasers.  Besides  this,  if  the  manufacture  be  new, 
and  the  owners  inexperienced,  or  have  skilful  competitors  abroad,  and 
countries  to  contend  with  where  labor  and  capital  are  much  lower,  the 
business  longer  established,  and  where  improvements  in  machinery  are 
frequent,  the  enterprise  will  become  a  most  hazardous  and  changeable 
one.  It  is  my  serious  belief  that,  from  such  causes,  and  various  abor- 
tive experiments,  and  a  want  of  skilful  agents,  and  little  omissions  to 
procure  early  improvements  and  the  best  workmen,  &c.  &c,  more 
capital  has  been  lost  in  the  last  twenty  years,  in  the  manufactures  of 
cotton  and  woollen  in  New  England  alone,  than  the  whole  capital 


TARIFF.  345 

which  is  left  in  those  branches,  or  the  whole  debt  at  the  close  of  our 
Revolution.  •  Some  of  us  there  can  speak  feelingly  and  experimentally 
on  this  subject.  At  the  same  time,  I  neither  conceal  nor  deny,  that, 
from  skilful  attention  and  other  fortunate  circumstances,  others  have 
made  large  profits.  But,  as  a  whole,  what  have  the  Union,  and  espe- 
cially New  England,  gained,  in  the  long  run,  by  such  a  system  ?  They 
have  gained,  I  admit,  by  those  manufactures  which  grow  without  the 
aid  of  a  hot-bed  system;  they  will  continue  to  gain  by  them.  So 
have  they  gained  by  household  manufactures  of  wool  and  cotton,  where 
pursued  at  leisure  moments,  and  by  the  decrepit  or  young,  not  fitted 
for  much  other  employment,  though  unprofitable  otherwise  now,  on  a 
large  scale,  without  the  aid  of  modern  machinery.  But,  under  the 
first  circumstances,  they  are  often  economical,  healthy,  moral ;  and  it 
is  they  which  Mr.  Jefferson  so  eloquently  commends  as  late  as  1812, 
and  Franklin  as  early  as  1784. 

The  theory  of  the  old  and  true  policy  was  to  let  industry,  of  its 
own  accord,  and  not  by  artificial  exertions,  pursue  what  was  most  nat- 
ural to  our  state  of  society,  the  free  genius  and  institutions  of  our  peo- 
ple, and  their  position  on  the  surface  of  the  earth ;  not  seeking  to 
raise  tropical  fruits  for  our  markets  in  the  temperate  zone,  or  to  make 
our  population  live  merely  on  exhilarating  gas  and  champagne.  What 
do  gentlemen  imagine  has  been  the  decline  in  such  manufactures,  after 
all  the  machinery  and  hot-bed  aid  to  others, —  and  others,  too,  whose 
great  use  of  machinery,  it  is  argued,  sinks  the  household  labors  into 
insignificance  and  loss  ?  Why,  sir,  though  the  prices  of  the  last  are 
little  affected  by  the  tariff  (they  being  mostly  made  to  use,  and  not  to 
sell),  yet,  by  the  census,  the  "family -made  goods,"  mostly  wool  and 
flax,  equal  yearly  near  $30,000,000.  They  are  stated  at  $29,023,- 
380 ;  when  the  great  woollen  establishments,  about  which  our  halls 
have  been  so  loudly  and  frequently  besieged,  yield  only  $20,696,999 ; 
and  the  cotton  establishments,  noisier  than  their  own  spindles,  yield 
but  $46,350,453.  This  is  near  half  as  much  household,  as  both 
cotton  and  woollen,  of  the  great  separate  establishments.  These 
returns  are,  doubtless,  imperfect  in  some  degree,  but  equally  so  as  to 
both  kinds.  To  see,  also,  how  little  the  whole  manufactures  of  the 
country  have  increased  in  the  aggregate  during  thirty  years,  with  such 
vast  governmental  protection,  they  are  now  returned  at  only  $239,- 
836,224,  when,  in  1810,  they  were  computed  at  $117,694,602,  and 
when  the  cottons,  in  1831,  were  estimated  by  their  friends  at  $40,- 
000,000,  and  have  increased  since  but  little  more  than  six;  and  in 
1810,  with  wool  and  flax,  were  estimated  as  high  as  they  are  now 
alone,  except  six  to  seven  millions ;  and  when  the  other  manufac- 
tures which  sprung  up  before  the  protective  system  in  1816  have 
increased  much  faster  in  proportion,  and  those  great  industrial  pursuits 
less  protected,  and  even  in  some  respects  oppressed,  have  in  agricul- 
ture probably  quadrupled  their  annual  produce,  and  nearly  trebled 
the  exports  of  domestic  origin,  after  supplying  any  additional  home 


346  TARIFF. 

market.  They  have  risen  from  $42,366,659,  in  1810,  to  $113,805,- 
634,  in  1840.  This  is  because  the  last  is  a  congenial,  suitable,  and 
healthy  employment ;  and  the  other,  in  most  cases,  is  artificial,  prema- 
ture, and  sickly. 

Let  it  not  be  said  that  I  wish  to  see  the  gains  by  modern  machinery 
and  steam  abandoned,  where  these  last  can  be  used  for  large  purposes, 
and  with  profit.  But  I  would  not  see  them  attempted  where  the  state 
of  society,  capital,  and  skill,  is  not  favorable  to  compete  with  others  in 
the  use  of  them,  without  ruinous  risks  and  losses,  unless  bolstered  up 
by  high  duties  and  taxes.  I  would  buy  and  use  such  manufactures 
whenever  cheapest  and  best ;  but  for  numerous  home  wants,  in  a  new 
and  agricultural  country,  like  much  of  ours,  why  not  take  what  is 
produced  by  such  establishments  and  improvements  elsewhere,  beyond 
what  can  be  furnished  through  the  frugal  aid  of  household  life  ?  Why 
tempt  our  own  people,  by  bounties,  into  the  heated  atmospheres  of 
great  establishments,  forced  into  being  often  prematurely  here,  by 
high  duties,  and  at  the  expense  of  other  large  classes  ?  What  com- 
mendation can  be  bestowed  on  these,  in  a  country  young  and  enter- 
prising, over  the  bracing  air  of  the  ploughman's  field,  or  the  rosy 
exercise  of  the  dairy,  or  the  transportation  of  the  products  of  both 
over  the  mountain  wave,  and  throwing  the  line  and  harpoon  in  every 
sea  ?  Most  persons  point  to  New  England  as  the  best  illustration  of 
the  great  profits  by  the  protective  system.  But,  beside  the  mischiefs 
already  alluded  to  as  incidental  to  it,  what  has  she  gained  from  it  in 
other  respects,  when  all  her  population  connected  with  her  great  cotton 
establishments  would  not  fill  a  single  county  in  several  of  our  States  1 
when  the  fisheries  alone  support  greater  numbers  1  when  many  of 
her  sons  are,  in  their  habits,  almost  as  web-footed  as  the  sea-fowl 
which  fly  over  their  heads  1  when,  if  not  diverted  from  agriculture, 
and  navigation,  and  the  fisheries,  her  hill-sides  would  probably  have 
been  ploughed  nearer  their  tops,  her  swamps  more  thoroughly  drained, 
her  manures  improved,  additional  inventions  in  raking,  threshing, 
reaping,  and  sowing,  sought  out,  or  the  present  ones  discovered  sooner; 
her  fisheries  doubled,  and  grown  to  what  they  are  in  England,  and  her 
ships  still  more  and  more  carrying  the  surplus  produce  of  much  of  the 
civilized  world? 

Her  population  and  capital  would,  in  that  event,  have  been  as  large, 
if  not  larger,  than  now ;  and  quite  as  hardy,  moral,  useful,  and  Amer- 
ican, as  it  is  now  ;  and  by  moderate  and  regular  profits,  far  less  tempt- 
ing to  inroads  on  our  frugal  habits,  and  on  our  primitive  morals,  now 
exposed  to  smuggling  and  all  its  train  of  demoralizations. 

To  be  sure,  we  have  the  flourishing  villages  that  were  often  referred 
to.  But,  in  one  of  them,  a  whole  crop  of  early  proprietors  had  lost 
their  investments ;  in  another,  the  church  was  deserted,  and  the  dwell- 
ings and  factory  buildings  desolate;  and  in  the  interior,  numerous 
other  cases  existed  of  dilapidation  and  ruin  to  early  establishments, 
called  prematurely  and  unskilfully  into  being  by  the  bounties  of  your 


TARIFF.  347 

high  protecting  duties.  And  it  was  melancholy  to  reflect,  that  even 
where  some  establishments  had  prospered,  and  cities  clustered  around 
them,  it  had  been  at  the  loss  of  the  more  remote  country, —  draining  it 
often  of  capital  as  well  as  enterprise  and  labor,  and  causing  decline 
and  desertion  in  one  place,  to  produce  business  and  display  in  another. 
Suppose,  then,  that  their  profits  are  great  in  some  establishments, 
and  the  wages  of  labor,  as  well  as  dividends  on  capital,  high.  Sup- 
pose, too,  that  there,  in  the  vibrations  of  traffic,  prices,  and  markets, 
some  have  yielded  exorbitant  profits ;  yet  they  cannot  long  continue  to 
do  it  steadily,  without  tempting  (where  everything  is  so  open  and 
free)  other  labor  and  other  capital  to  flock  to  them,  and  equalize  their 
profits  to  what  are  made  in  other  branches  of  industry.  The  whole 
business  in  cottons,  woollens,- iron,  &c,  on  a  large  scale,  depends  so 
much  for  profits  on  little  improvements  in  machinery  and  chemistry, 
&c,  that  the  perils  and  reverses  at  times  appal  the  stoutest  heart; 
while,  on  the  contrary,  the  large  gains  from  machinery,  which  have 
been  referred  to  by  the  chairman,  are  not  permanent  to  that  class,  but 
temporary  to  them,  though  permanent  and  useful  to  the  world  at 
large.  Others  soon  come  in  and  employ  them  also,  till  the  rate  of 
profits  is  but  little  higher  than  in  other  pursuits.  Hence,  granting 
that  England  has  not  merely  the  labor  of  two  millions,  but  over  fifty 
millions  of  men,  in  her  cotton  machinery  alone,  and  that  of  three  hun- 
dred millions  of  men  in  all  her  manufactures, —  with  machinery  so 
perfect,  that,  if  not  talking,  it  tells  when  a  thread  breaks,  or  the  water- 
power  vacillates, —  has  not  France,  also,  and  Germany,  and  the  United 
States,  no  less  than  her  people,  burst  down  the  barriers  of  patents  and 
the  restrictions  against  the  export  of  machinery,  and  let  in  all  nations 
to  the  benefits  of  it,  and  reduced  the  profits  of  those  using  it  to  near 
the  standard  in  other  pursuits,  unless  raised  higher,  for  a  time,  by 
discriminating  and  partial  duties?  Dr.  Faustus,  when  he  invented 
the  type,  might,  like  any  other  monopolist,  profit  much  for  a  while  by 
keeping  the  improvement  secret,  and  adhering  to  old  prices ;  but,  soon 
as  the  invention  becomes  known,  or  the  monopoly  broken  down,  the 
individual  gains  in  printing,  as  well  as  other  business  aided  by  ma- 
chinery, had  to  stand  little,  if  any  higher,  than  those  in  employments 
not  so  aided.  And  pray  tell  me,  sir,  as  a  question  of  profit  to  the 
whole  country  by  machinery  in  manufactures,  and  aids  not  derived 
from  labor,  is  there  no  profit  also  to  the  whole  by  labor-saving  ma- 
chinery in  agriculture, —  the  plough  and  the  scythe, —  by  raking  with 
horse-power,  and  threshing,  and  even  reaping  and  cleaning  grain,  the 
same  way  ?  But,  much  more,  is  there  nothing  in  the  dews  and  rains, 
and  winds  and  sunshine,  with  which  God  has  blessed  peculiarly,  and 
always  will  bless,  his  chosen  race  —  the  tillers  of  the  soil  ?  —  nothing 
to  aid  the  country  in  navigation,  beyond  labor  and  capital  ?  — 
nothing  in  the  oceans,  lakes,  and  rivers,  that  cover  three-fourths  of 
the  globe,  for  highways  to  the  seaman  and  merchant  1  —  nothing  in  the 
winds,  which  blow  freely  to  waft  him  1  —  nothing  to  the  country  in  the 


348  TARIFF. 

fisheries,  beyond  labor  and  the  vessel?  —  nothing  in  the  shore  and 
bank  treasures  of  the  finny  tribes,  growing  for  the  adventurer  without 
pay  or  expense ;  and  the  whales  which,  unhired,  await  his  coming  in 
every  sea?  Opening  the  earth  to  all  profitable  employments,  the 
bounties  of  Providence  naturally  attract  more  to  agriculture,  not  only 
from  its  healthfullness,  but  safety,  and  its  best  guards  against  famine 
and  disease,  so  incident  to  crowded  manufacturing.  In  the  worst 
revulsions,  the  surplus  of  grain  and  meat  can  help  to  sustain  life ;  but 
neither  cottons,  nor  woollens,  nor  iron,  can  be  eaten,  when  markets  fail, 
or  war  cuts  off  other  supplies. 

In  another  point  of  view,  the  supposed  gain  to  this  country  by  the 
use  of  machinery  in  great  manufacturing  establishments  becomes,  in 
truth,  only  a  question  between  the  expediency  of  having  them  used 
here,  where  dearest,  least  understood,  or  least  perfect,  and  abroad, 
where  it  is  the  reverse. 

So,  if  we  go  to  the  statistics  of  the  late  census,  similar  results  are 
demonstrated.  It  is  imperfect  in  some  respects,  and  conclusions  some- 
what different  are  drawn  by  different  persons.  But,  after  being  revised 
and  corrected,  the  gains  in  manufacturing,  though  high,  are  probably 
not  much  higher  than  in  other  pursuits,  if  we  deduct  what  is  added  by 
the  discriminating  duties.  Without  that  deduction,  they  reach  near 
one  hundred  and  sixty  dollars  yearly,  on  an  average,  to  each  person 
employed  and  connected  with  them;  whereas,  in  agriculture,  they 
yield  but  sixty-two  dollars,  or  less  than  half,  and  in  navigation  only 
eighty  dollars. 

[Mr.  Evans  here  denied  that  he  had  stated  the  earnings  in  manu- 
factures to  be  so  high.] 

No,  sir ;  but  the  official  returns,  when  duly  revised,  state  this ;  and 
it  can  be  accounted  for  fully  in  no  other  way  than  the  protection  they 
enjoy,  —  great,  even  on  a  twenty  per  cent,  duty,  and  much  more  on 
one  of  eighty  or  a  hundred. 

[Mr.  Evans  said  a  deduction  for  interest  on  capital  in  manufactures 
should  be  made.] 

So  it  might  be  in  all  other  pursuits,  as  well  as  this,  when  you  come 
to  divide  the  gross  produce  between  the  capitalist  and  the  laborer. 
But  it  happened  that  the  capital  was  larger  per  head  in  agriculture 
than  in  manufactures ;  it  being  two  hundred  and  thirty-five  dollars 
each  in  the  first,  and  two  hundred  dollars  only  in  the  last,  though  in 
navigation  it  was  higher,  being  three  hundred  and  three  dollars  each. 
(See  Tables  No.  15  and  16.)* 

Gentlemen  may  take  whichsoever  horn  of  the  dilemma  is  most  agree- 
able ;  and  if  the  profits  are  no  higher,  after  the  reduction  of  the  gain 
by  high  duties,  than  in  other  pursuits,  there  is  no  advantage  to  the 
whole  country  by  the  forcing  system.  We  pay  for  all  we  get.  But 
if  they  are  higher  after  it,  then  the  forcing  is  not  necessary,  besides 
its  being  partial  and  wasteful  in  order  to  aid  them. 

*  Appendix,  S  and  T. 


TARIFF.  349 

Many,  however,  urge  that  manufactures  ought  to  be  encouraged  by 
a  costly  protective  system,  because  their  labor  and  business  are  so 
much  more  American  than  any  other.  The  additional  persons  it 
employed  in  this  country,  it  was  argued,  increased  the  public  pros- 
perity and  independence  enough  to  counterbalance  all  the  evils  of  so 
unnatural  and  burdensome  a  system.  Now,  sir,  a  little  analysis  will 
expose  the  folly  of  this  assumption.  When  more  persons  were  tempted 
by  war  duties  and  privations,  and  then  by  the  high  discriminating 
tariffs  which  followed,  to  embark  in  manufactures,  whence  came  they? 
They  were  either  imported  foreigners  (against  whom,  however,  he 
nurtured  no  idle  prejudices),  or  they  were  Americans,  previously 
engaged  in  agriculture,  commerce,  and  the  fisheries. 

Now,  did  this  change  in  pursuit  of  a  thousand  Americans  increase 
the  number  of  Americans  before  existing  ?  It  was  still  but  a  thou- 
sand in  the  new  employment.  And  did  the  change  make  their 
labor  and  capital  any  more  American  than  it  had  been  before,  by 
going  from  agriculture  to  manufactures  ?  So,  if  a  portion  of  our 
present  manufacturers,  under  lower  duties,  should  quit  these  for  the 
plough,  the  counter,  or  the  deck,  where  they  or  their  fathers  before 
labored,  would  they,  by  this  restoration,  cease  to  be  Americans,  or 
their  industry  cease  to  be  American  ?  By  no  means.  And  the  prej- 
udice excited  by  partisans  against  the  foreign  or  pauper  labor  of 
Europe,  in  order  to  color  the  truth  as  to  the  case  just  stated  (but 
which,  it  is  perceived,  has  no  concern  with  it,  as,  after  and  before  the 
change,  the  labor  of  the  same  persons  is  just  as  American,  and  just  as 
little  European,  as  it  was  before),  is  a  prejudice  which  is  to  operate 
only  when  beneficial  to  them,  and  never  when  hostile  to  their  interests. 
They  never  reject  the  pauper  labor  of  Europe,  if  it  emigrates  here 
and  works  at  lower  wages  in  their  establishments  ;  but  they  invite  it 
hither,  and  hunt  for  it  in  Canada.  They  never  reject  it,  if  it  comes 
here  in  the  shape  of  new  improvements  in  their  machinery  or  dyes  ; 
but  they  send  agents  across  the  Atlantic  to  buy  and  import  it.  In  fine, 
they  never  reject,  but  discriminate  in  favor  of  it,  as  compared  with 
other  articles,  if  it  comes  here  as  a  raw  material  useful  to  manufactures. 

The  beggarly  lazzaroni  of  Naples  may  labor  to  collect  rags  for  paper, 
and  it  is  all  very  well  for  the  manufacturer  to  encourage  it  by  a  low 
rather  than  prohibitory  duty,  and  make  the  community  pay  a  high 
one  on  the  paper  manufactured  from  them.  The  convict  laborer  of 
New  Holland,  and  the  slaves  of  Morocco,  may  shear  cheap  wool  and 
send  it  here  free,  or  at  a  pittance  of  duty,  to  be  used  by  the  manufac- 
turers, while  those  who  use  the  woollens  made  from  it  must  pay  a  high 
tax  on  them.  Even  the  Indian  toil  of  Chili  or  Buenos  Ay  res  may 
throw  the  lasso  and  collect  hides  at  small  expense,  and  the  manufac- 
turers are  willing  to  benefit  at  the  lowest  duties  on  them  by  all  that 
pauper  labor,  and  charge  us  high  for  the  leather  made  from  them ; 
and  act  similarly  by  the  labor  of  the  serfs  of  Russia  in  raising  hemp, 
which,  though  paying  a  higher  duty,  pays  one  not  half  so  high  as  is 
30 


350  TARIFF. 

imposed  on  us  for  the  manufacture  of  it ;  and,  without  giving  more 
instances,  the  very  garments  we  wear  are  colored  in  part  by  indigo, 
cultivated  by  the  slave  labor  of  India,  admitted  free  here ;  though  the 
garments  are  taxed  high,  and  though  it  is  an  American  production, 
and  once  considerably  raised  in  the  Southern  States.  Hence,  there  is 
no  indemnity  for  the  other  injuries  of  the  protective  system,  by  its 
employing  or  encouraging,  in  these  ways,  either  American  labor  or 
capital ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  a  direct  discrimination  in  favor  of  the 
pauper  labor  all  the  world  over,  to  the  injury  of  all  American  labor 
at  all  competing  with  it,  or  which  might  compete  with  it,  if  protected 
by  as  high  a  duty  as  is  imposed  on  the  manufactures  from  it.  And 
why  not  shield  our  labor  in  one  case  as  fully  as  in  the  other :  and  by 
a  like  duty,  if  any  of  it  is  devoted,  or  would  then  be,  to  such  produc- 
tions ?  And  if  the  farmer  (not  now  financier)  of  Andalusia  should 
ask  for  more  protection  for  his  pine-apples  and  grapes,  could  he  not 
defend  the  prayer  in  aid  of  his  American  labor  and  capital  quite  as 
plausibly  as  some  parts  of  the  present  system  are  defended  ? 

To  show,  in  other  respects,  how  little  averse  its  friends  are  to  the  use 
of  foreign  labor  and  foreign  products,  when  useful  to  them,  and  that 
entirely  free,  let  me  refer  the  Senate  to  thirty  or  forty  such  articles  in 
the  act  of  1842, —  a  list  of  most  of  which  is  appended  to  Table  No.  4.* 

The  only  escape  from  all  this  is  a  mere  question  of  dollars  and  cents 
in  profit  and  loss  by  manufactures,  over  other  pursuits ;  and  not  the 
plausible  but  exploded  one,  that  they  are  more  American,  and  there- 
fore more  patriotic.  But  as  to  those  greater  gains,  we  have  already 
attempted  to  explain  how,  in  the  long  run,  the  species  of  manufactures 
raised  up  by  high  protection  has  not  been  durably  productive  of  large 
profits  to  the  whole  engaged  in  them,  or  of  advantage  to  the  commu- 
nity as  a  whole. 

If  the  restrictive  system,  then,  employs  no  more  American  labor 
and  capital  than  would  be  employed  in  other  pursuits  and  in  profita- 
ble manufactures  here,  without  it, — if  it  uses  foreign  labor  and  foreign 
products,  whenever  more  beneficial  to  the  manufacturers  themselves, — 
if,  in  fine,  it  yields  no  greater  profits  to  the  whole  country,  as  a  whole, 
no  greater  ability  and  prosperity,  than  without  it, — I  entreat  gentlemen 
to  point  out  how  it  is  more  patriotic,  or  useful,  than  other  pursuits,  so 
as  to  produce  those  great  advantages,  in  a  general  point  of  view,  which 
are  supposed,  by  some,  to  counterbalance  the  many  evils  already 
explained.  The  only  specific  position  left  in  their  favor,  unexamined, 
is,  that  they  tend  to  make  us  independent,  as  a  nation,  of  other  coun- 
tries. It  is  not  independence  in  producing  instruments  and  munitions 
of  war,  and  for  national  defence,  as  many  erroneously  suppose ;  since 
those  we  have  long  made  for  ourselves,  and  the  duties,  high  or  low, 
are  of  little  consequence ;  but  it  is  independence  for  the  necessaries 
and  comforts,  as  well  as  some  of  the  luxuries,  of  every-day  and  peace- 
ful life.      Yes,  sir;  this  kind  of  independence  is  gravely  urged  as 

•  Appendix,  H. 


TARIFF.  351 

momentous  to  the  nation,  and  for  other  classes,  when  the  manufac- 
turers themselves  go  to  foreign  countries  for  all  their  raw  materials, 
dyes,  and  machinery,  when  obtained  there  cheaper;  when  they  are 
dependent,  and  it  is  a  part  of  their  system  to  remain  dependent,  on 
foreign  countries  for  much  of  their  hides,  hemp,  cheap  wool,  indigo, 
and  hundreds  of  other  articles,  because  they  obtain  them  at  lower 
prices  there.  Can  gentlemen  forget  that  this  is  an  admission  of  all 
we  contend  for,  which  is  to  be  dependent  on  other  countries  for  manu- 
factures themselves,  no  less  than  other  articles,  when  we  can  obtain 
them  there  cheaper,  and  only  then  ? 

On  this  principle,  we  only  ask  leave  to  amend  this  partial  system 
so  that  we  may  go  for  fine  cottons  and  woollens  to  England  and  France, 
where  long  experience  and  skill,  and  great  capital,  enable  them  to  make 
such  articles  cheaper  than  here,  and  where  improvements,  too,  are  rapid 
and  great.  So,  when  dependence  here  between  different  classes  and 
pursuits  is  commended  by  eloquent  arguments  in  favor  of  diversity 
of  pursuits  and  sweet  interchanges  of  industry,  is  it  forgotten  that, 
under  our  system,  this  variety  and  kindness  would  still  remain  to  a 
useful  extent,  and  be,  by  our  commerce,  diffused  wider  to  all  people  1 
It  is  this  mutual  dependence  among  inhabitants  of  all  nations,  as  well 
as  of  the  same,  which  is  the  great  nurse  of  commerce,  and  wealth,  and 
civilization.  It  divides  among  them  the  surplus  of  each,  as  well  as  all 
their  arts  and  learning,  and  other  excellences.  It  is  the  path-finder, 
not  only  to  mutual  gain,  but  a  purer  religion,  and  higher  prosperity, 
and  more  durable  peace,  the  world  over.  Foreign  nations  thus  become 
as  dependent  on  us  as  we  on  them; — not  political  dependence,  which  is 
often  inadvertently  confounded  with  this,  but  social  and  commercial 
and  literary  dependence,  which  is  the  best  guaranty  of  progress  in 
human  affairs. 

It  is  folly  to  suppose  that  we,  or  any  other  nation,  can  unite  success- 
fully within  itself  the  productions  and  manufactures  of  all  others,  all 
climates,  and  all  stages  of  civilization  ;  that  we,  or  England,  can  raise 
as  cheap  and  usefully  the  drugs  of  Turkey  as  Turkey  herself,  or  the 
fruits  of  Spain,  or  wines  of  France  ;  or  they  compete  with  England  in 
making  iron,  or  with  us  in  raising  cotton  or  pork,  or  making  lead. 
And  hence,  while  we  ought  not  to  become  fanatics  or  visionaries, 
attempting  to  concentrate  everything  in  one  spot  (which  alone  could 
be  effected  by  Deity,  but  never  yet,  for  wise  reasons,  has  been  done 
even  by  Him),  let  us  be  content  to  buy  all  we  need  where  it  can 
without  force  be  produced  cheapest,  whether  at  home  or  abroad  ;  and 
sell  all  we  do  not  need  where  it  will  bring  most,  whether  at  home  or 
abroad.  In  this  way,  we  shall  follow  out  the  apparent  dictates  of 
Providence,  in  giving  advantages,  in  some  things,  to  all  climates  and 
people,  to  be  exchanged  with  others  through  the  blessings  of  free  com- 
merce, and  thus  adopting  the  best  apparent  method  of  increasing  our 
prosperity,  and  extending  civilization,  and  securing  peace  throughout 
the  world. 


352  TARIFF. 

While  all  has  changed  and  is  moving  onward,  are  we  to  go  back,  and 
cling  to  the  dark  restrictive  systems  of  a  ruder  civilization  1  Are  we 
prepared  to  take  the  backward  step,  so  as  to  protect,  by  discriminating 
duties,  the  old  channels  of  commerce  by  the  Euphrates  and  the  Isthmus 
of  Suez,  and  again  to  build  up  Tyre,  Alexandria,  and  Yenice,  rather 
than  doubling  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope  1  Are  we  to  tax  higher  the  use 
of  steam  in  navigation,  so  as  to  encourage  oars  and  sails  ? 

By  officious  legislation,  sir,  are  we  to  stop  all  improvement ;  and, 
while  this  new  power  in  commerce  is  bringing  all  nearer,  and  making 
every  people  better  acquainted  with  each  other's  wants  and  abundance, 
—  not  only  transferring  St.  Louis  to  Pittsburg,  and  New  Orleans  to 
Charleston,  but  Europe  as  near  as  Halifax  in  days  of  yore, —  are  we 
to  counteract  these  new  facilities  for  more  intimate,  enlarged,  prosper- 
ous and  free  trade,  and,  while  the  Celestial  empire  itself  is  opening  its 
ports  under  the  progress  of  the  age,  virtually  block  all  foreign  ones  up 
to  us  and  ours,  forever,  by  a  more  stringent  and  restrictive  policy  on 
our  part? 

Much  more  must  we  beware  of  pushing  this  selfish  system  so  as  to 
operate  not  equally  on  one  great  people,  but  invidiously  on  sections 
and  classes.  Still  more  must  we  beware  of  such  an  unjust  course 
among  ourselves,  and  under  our  peculiar  form  of  government,  founded 
and  to  be  sustained  only  on  mutual  concessions,  mutual  sacrifices  and 
gains,  and  what  should  be  durable  and  faithful  compromises.  Beware, 
sir,  of  seeking  to  escape  from  such  compromises, —  though  in  technical 
legislation  not  forever  binding,  —  lest  all  amicable  and  honorary 
engagements  become  stripped  of  much  of  their  moral  force,  and  we 
seem  punic  in  appearance,  if  not  in  reality.  Beware,  too,  of  a  perma- 
nent return  to  that  system  which  has  once  been  abandoned  for  its  perils 
to  all  held  holy  in  our  political  brotherhood.  Beware  of  tearing  open, 
to  fester  anew  and  worse,  old  wounds  that  had  been  mostly  healed,  and 
which  wrong  is  inflicted  by  the  exercise  of  such  doubtful  powers  as  will 
justify  the  wildest  schemes  of  internal  improvement ;  for  that  general 
welfare  which  can  be  set  up  by  the  interested  in  defence  of  all  extrav- 
agances can  justify  distributions  of  the  public  treasures  or  public 
lands,  and  end  in  the  assumption  of  two  hundred  millions  of  State 
debts.  Beware  of  a  policy,  constitutional  or  otherwise,  whose  tendency 
is  like  that  which,  in  the  British  corn-laws,  now  agitates  our  parent 
country  to  its  centre. 

Above  all,  sir,  let  us,  like  the  senator  from  Maine,  read  the  injunc- 
tions of  the  farewell  address  of  the  father  of  his  country  against  the 
causes  of  disunion,  as  well  as  disunion  itself.  Let  him  read  and  re-read 
the  injunctions  of  that  warning  voice  against  the  spirit  of  partiality  and 
encroachment  towards  fraternal  rights;  against  the  inroads  that 
fanaticism,  or  avarice,  or  party,  in  the  domineering  spirit  of  powerful 
majorities,  may  be  tempted  to  risk.  Let  him  tell  them  to  beware  as 
to  inconsiderate  memorials  here  to  dissolve  that  hallowed  Union  on 
account  of  one  of  the  compromises  which  led  to  it ;  and,  above  all,  to 


NAVAL  SCHOOL.  353 

Beware  how  petitions  are  encouraged  which,  under  the  distresses  of 
War,  formerly  were  confined  to  a  faction,  and  died,  on  their  way  hither, 
at  the  news  of  peace.  Beware  how  such  petitions  are  now  encouraged 
to  stalk  into  this  very  hall,  from  State  legislatures,  and  urge  us  to 
unsettle  the  great  compromises  on  which  the  Union  itself  rests,  and 
which,  if  prostrated,  may  lead  not  only  to  separation,  but  scenes  of 
border  warfare,  if  not  servile  conflagration  and  carnage,  such  as  never 
before  crimsoned  the  pages  of  history. 


NAYAL  SCHOOL  * 


Mr.  Woodbury's  remarks  on  the  naval  school  were  substantially 
as  follows : 

He  stated  that  the  first  and  indispensable  point,  with  a  young  officer, 
was,  whether  he  could  bear  the  exposure  and  roll  of  the  ocean.  If  he 
could  not,  all  expense  in  educating  him  for  the  service  was  lost.  Hence, 
the  first  order  long  had  been,  and  should  continue  to  be,  an  order  to 
sea.  After  that  experiment,  if  the  constitution  and  taste  of  the  indi- 
vidual proved  suitable,  it  was  not  only  proper  to  give  him  aid  by  lit- 
erary and  scientific  instruction  on  ship-board,  but,  when  off  duty, 
on  shore.  The  deck  of  the  vessel,  however,  was  the  best  school- 
house  or  academy  to  begin  with ;  and  there,  to  mingle  explanations  and 
reading  with  actual  experiment.  Even  on  shore,  the  teaching  should 
be  rather  to  occupy  suitably  his  leisure  hours,  and  advance  him  in  his 
naval  pursuits,  than  to  give  him  land  habits  or  land  tastes.  The 
naval  officer  should  be  a  sailor, —  an  informed,  intelligent,  moral,  and 
intellectual  sailor,  if  you  please, —  but  still  a  son  of  the  ocean,  and  dedi- 
cated, heart  and  soul,  for  life,  to  all  its  arduous  duties,  great  exposure 
and  high  responsibilities.  In  truth,  his  true  home  is  on  the  moun- 
tain icave. 

It  was  no  more  proper  to  send  the  army  officer  or  the  cadet  at  West 
Point  to  sea,  than  to  keep  the  naval  officer  much  on  shore,  and  attach 

*  A  speech  in  favor  of  establishing  a  Naval  School;  delivered  in  the  Senate  of  the 
United  States,  August  10,  1842. 

30* 


354  NAVAL  SCHOOL. 

him  strongly  to  shore  scenes  and  shore  pursuits.  The  most  abhorrent 
idea  to  a  genuine  tar  is  a  land-lubber.  Hence,  the  school  for  his  leisure 
hours,  while  not  afloat,  should  be,  as  it  had  been  for  many  years,  on 
or  near  salt  water,  and  attached  to  some  navy-yard. 

Mr.  W.  had  no  great  objection  to  changing  a  receiving- ship  (the 
usual  place  for  instruction)  to  a  fort  or  barracks,  or  other  suitable 
building  connected  with  some  naval  station;  though,  in  some  respects, 
a  vessel  had  advantages  for  illustration  of  nautical  terms,  and  for  form- 
ing nautical  tastes  and  habits.  A  vessel  should  be  used  for  short 
experimental  cruises  frequently,  even  if  the  school  was  on  shore.  But 
he  entertained  a  decided  opinion  that  the  whole  establishment  should 
be  under  naval  officers,  naval  discipline,  and  the  jurisdiction  of  some 
naval  station.  And  so  far  from  admitting  to  the  school  any  not  offi- 
cers, or  officers  before  having  seen  sea-service,  he  felt  confident  that 
abuses  would  creep  in,  and  the  whole  scheme  prove  abortive,  if  either 
of  those  courses  was  tolerated.  Such,  in  a  few  words,  were  his  general 
views  on  this  topic.  Assured  as  he  was  that  this  school  would  be 
conducted  on  the  principle  he  approved,  his  vote  would  be  given  for 
the  bill. 

There  was  a  mistake  in  supposing  that  the  difference  of  pay  in  the 
navy  and  the  commercial  marine  created  the  present  difficulty  in  pro- 
curing a  full  supply  of  seamen.  On  the  contrary,  when  promptly 
paid  and  humanely  treated  in  the  navy,  sailors  generally  preferred  it 
to  the  merchant  service.  They  had  better  medical  attendance  when 
sick,  and  pensions  when  disabled ;  and  there  was  an  honest  pride  in 
wearing  the  insignia  of  their  country,  and  serving  under  its  public  flag. 
It  was  regarded  as'  an  honor,  and  justly  so.  But  the  difficulty  lay 
deeper.  Our  commercial  marine  had  greatly  increased  in  the  last  ten 
years,  and  the  growth  of  our  tonnage  there  had  created  a  large  addi- 
tional demand  for  seamen  in  the  domestic  as  well  as  foreign  trade.  At 
the  same  time,  the  navy  had  been  so  augmented  recently  as  to  require 
nine  or  ten  thousand  seamen,  instead  of  only  five.  Tins  was  the  true 
source  of  most  of  the  difficulty. 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS.  355 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS.* 

If  I  understand  the  substance  of  all  the  objections  to  the  ratification 
of  the  present  treaty,  whether  expressed  in  resolutions  or  debate,  it  is 
this: 

First,  that  the  government  of  the  United  States  does  not  possess 
the  constitutional  right  or  power  to  purchase  Texas,  and  admit  her 
people  into  the  Union.  Next,  that  the  present  government  of  Texas 
alone  has  not  the  right  or  competency  to  make  such  a  cession  of  her 
territory  and  sovereignty.  And,  finally,  that  it  is  not  our  duty  at 
present  to  complete  the  cession,  even  were  the  right  on  both  sides 
clear. 

This  seems  to  me  to  be  the  whole  case,  when  stripped  of  details  and 
perplexing  appendages.  I  shall  examine  these  positions  separately, 
and  I  trust  with  that  fairness  and  dispassionate  spirit  which  belong  to 
a  question  so  momentous  to  our  own  country,  as  well  as  a  sister 
republic ;  a  question,  too,  on  which  I  speak  as  the  organ  of  no  admin- 
istration or  party,  but  above  and  beyond  them  all,  as  an  independent 
senator  of  an  independent  State,  and  trying  to  regard  her  interests, 
and  those  of  the  whole  Union,  in  the  long  vista  of  the  future,  no  less 
than  at  the  present  moment. 

Some  deny  the  constitutional  power  to  purchase  any  territory 
situated  without  our  original  limits ;  while  others  deny  not  only  that, 
but  the  power,  at  any  time,  to  admit  such  territory  and  inhabitants 
into  the  Union  as  States. 

Both  of  these  powers  have  been  exercised  in  the  cases  of  buying 
Louisiana  and  the  Floridas,  and  afterwards  of  admitting  the  three 
States  of  Louisiana,  Arkansas,  and  Missouri,  carved  out  of  the  former 
territory.  They  have,  therefore,  long  been  regarded  as  settled  ques- 
tions, till  the  opposition  to  them  in  this  chamber,  by  the  senators  from 
New  Jersey,  Massachusetts,  and  Rhode  Island  (Messrs.  Miller, 
Choate,  and  Simmons),  has  burst  forthwith  such  vehemence,  that 
it  may  be  well  to  advert  to  a  few  principles  and  authorities  in  their 
support. 

I  do  this  the  more  readily,  as  the  pretence  that  such  a  purchase 
and  admission  into  the  Union  are  unconstitutional  is  the  only  plausi- 
ble justification  for  the  otherwise  treacherous  or  fanatical  cry  of 
disunion,  which  so  often  deafens  our  ears.  That  cry  originated  on 
an  occasion  almost  identical  with  this,  when  the  act  for  admitting  Lou- 
isiana as  a  State,  in  1811,  was  pending. 

In  the  debate  on  that  occasion,  a  member  from  Massachusetts  over- 
flowed with  such  threats,  till  he  was  called  to  order  for  his  violence, 

*  A  speech  on  the  treaty  for  the  re-annexation  of  Texas  to  the  United  States  ;  deliv- 
ered in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  June  4,  1844. 


356  RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

and  escaped  censure,  on  an  appeal  from  the  Speaker's  decision  against 
him,  only  from  a  conviction,  in  some  of  his  opponents,  that  his  threats 
would  prove  harmless.  It  was  then  the  memorable  saying  was  first 
uttered,  which  is  now  ringing  again  in  our  ears  from  the  same  class 
of  politicians  and  from  the  same  State,  but  with  less  point  and  .elegance 
in  these  degenerate  days.     Mr.  Quincy  said :  - 

"  If  this  bill  passes,  it  is  my  deliberate  opinion  that  it  is  virtually  a  dissolution  of 
the  Union  ;  that  it  will  free  the  States  from  their  moral  obligations  ;  and  that,  as  it 
"will  then  be  the  right  of  all,  so  it  will  be  the  duty  of  some,  definitely  to  prepare  for 
separation,  —  amicably  if  they  can,  forcibly  if  they  must." —  (See  National  Intelli- 
gencer, Jan.  19,  1819,  and  Lambert  on  Rules,  p.  74.)* 

It  is  true  that  the  madness  of  faction  can  threaten  disunion  on  the 
smallest  as  well  as  greatest  occasions,  and  may  at  times  venture  on 
it,  unless  deterred  by  a  dread  of  the  halter  ;  but  it  is  equally  true  that 
there  is  no  more  real  occasion  or  justification  for  it  now,  than  there 
was  when  so  much  vaporing  passed  off  harmlessly,  in  1803  and  1811, 
about  Louisiana,  or  than  there  was  in  the  purchase  of  Florida  in  1819,  or 
the  admission  of  Missouri  in  1822.  If  those  purchases  and  admissions 
were  constitutional,  so  are  these ;  and  in  order  to  allay  the  renewed 
excitement  on  this  point  (honest  with  many,  I  have  no  doubt),  the 
patience  of  the  Senate  is  asked  a  few  minutes.  : 

The  words  of  the  third  section,  article  fourth,  of  the  constitution,  are.: 
"New  States  may  be  admitted  by  the  Congress  into  the  Union.'7  This 
is  the  whole  that  bears  on  the  point  now  under  consideration,  and  is 
broad  and  explicit  enough  to  cover  all  cases  deemed  expedient  and 
proper  by  Congress,  whether  situated  without  or  within  our  original 
limits.  I  admit  that  Mr.  Jefferson,  not  having  been  a  member  of  the 
convention  which  framed  the  constitution,  did  at  first  consider  it 
doubtful  whether,  by  construction,  this  power  ought  not  to  be  confined 
to  States  within  our  former  limits ;  and  he  even  went  so  far  as  to  have 
a  clause  for  the  amendment  of  the  constitution  prepared,  to  cover  the 
case  of  Louisiana.  But,  after  full  examination,  and  conferences  with 
others,  it  is  inferable  as  certain  that  he  became  convinced  such  an 
amendment  was  unnecessary,  as  it  was  abandoned,  and  he  not  only 

*  The  democratic  party,  notwithstanding,  passed  the  bill  by  a  vote  of  seventy-seven 
yeas  to  thirty-six  nays.  The  former  included  those  sterling  republicans,  the  Craw- 
fords,  Macons,  Calhouns,  Bacons,  Cutts,  Fiskes,  and  even  Clays  and  Roots  ;  while 
the  latter  were  made  up  of  the  Quincys  and  Wheatons,  and  the  Hales  and  Wilsons, 
who  then  stood  at  the  head  of  the  federalism  of  the  east.  The  original  treaty  had 
been  ratified  in  a  like  manner  by  twenty-seven  republican  yeas  and  seven  federal 
nays.  How  is  the  division  of  opinion  on  this  subject  now  ?  At  a  whig  anti-annexation 
meeting  in  Worcester,  Massachusetts,  a  resolution  was  recently  adopted  "  to  separate 
the  free  States  from  the  others,  if  annexation  prevailed."  And  ten  members  of  the 
House  of  Representatives,  headed  by  Messrs.  Adams,  Giddings  and  Slade,  issued  a 
manifesto,  last  year,  declaring  that  annexation  "  would  be  identical  with  dissolution 
of  the  Union."  —  (See  Niles'  Register,  p.  175,  for  May  13,  1843.) 

The  Boston  Times  of  the  1st  inst.  says,  likewise,  "  The  abolitionists  passed  a  vote 
last  evening  to  dissolve  the  Union." 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS.  857 

» 
completed  the  treaty,  but  signed  the  act  of  Congress  establishing  terri- 
torial government  over  what  had  been  purchased ;  and  Mr.  Madison, 
with  his  republican  coadjutors  in  1811,  became  convinced  that  the 
power,  now  and  then  questioned,  clearly  existed,  or  they  never  could 
have  supported  the  act  for  the  admission  of  Louisiana  as  a  State.  In 
truth,  so  fully  had  their  opponents  become  of  a  like  opinion  on  this 
point,  that  the  admission  neither  of  Missouri  nor  Arkansas  was 
resisted  on  this  account;  and  the  purchase  of  Florida,  in  1819,  was 
approved  as  constitutional  by  every  senator,  federalist  or  republican. 

The  reasons  for  a  change  in  opinion  with  some  undoubtedly  were, 
that  the  words  in  which  the  power  was  conveyed  to  Congress  were 
unequivocal  and  explicit  in  favor  of  its  widest  scope ;  that  they  had 
been  made  more  so  in  the  progress  of  the  constitution  through  the  con- 
vention ;  and  that  this  was  known  to  have  been  done  so  not  only  to 
include  one  foreign  territory,  in  the  case  of  Canada,  which  had  been 
specially  provided  for  in  the  articles  of  the  old  Confederation,  but  to 
embrace  all  the  contiguous  British,  or  Spanish,  or  vacant  regions, 
whose  future  union  with  us  might  afterwards  be  mutually  desirable. 

The  framers  of  the  constitution  were  men  who  looked  deep  into  the 
future,  and  had  no  design  to  strip  themselves  of  any  high  national 
powers  or  destinies. 

When  it  was  objected  by  some,  in  debate,  in  1811,  that,  on  this  con- 
struction, States  might  be  admitted,  not  only  contiguous,  but  in  the 
West  Indies,  South  America,  and  even  Europe,  the  reply  seemed 
sensible  and  pertinent,  that,  on  the  American  theory  of  self-govern- 
ment, no  reason  existed  why  we  should  not  be  allowed  to  admit  any  State 
that  would  conform  to  our  representative  system,  and  whose  union  with 
us  should,  by  the  majority  of  both  countries,  or  the  proper  authorities, 
be  considered  mutually  advantageous ;  and  that  we  might  well  wish  to 
extend  the  blessings  of  our  government  as  widely  as  practicable. 

So  far  as  convenient  and  beneficial,  the  whole  world  may  thus 
become  partners,  says  Mansfield's  Political  Grammar  (pp.  143  and 
144).  This  extended  construction  of  the  power  has  proved  a  salu- 
tary one.  (Story's  Constitutional  Class  Book,  p.  98.)  It  is  settled 
beyond  practical  doubt.  (Duer's  Outlines  of  Constitutional  Jurispru- 
dence, p.  186.) 

Such  is  the  view  in  Tucker's  Blackstone.  (Ap.,  vol.  I.,  p.  278.) 
And  the  Federalist  itself  looked  to  the  clause  for  admitting  new  States 
generally  as  designed  to  include  foreign  territories  adjoining  us.  (See 
No.  43.) 

So  Mr.  Macon  said,  in  the  debate  as  to  Louisiana,  that  the  consti- 
tution was  designedly  made  broad,  so  as  to  admit  such  a  foreign  ter- 
ritory and  government  as  Canada,  when  agreeable  to  both :  because 
the^  territory  and  people  within  our  limits  were  already  within  the 
Union,  and  entitled  to  be,  under  old  compacts,  treaties,  and  cessions. 

Such  also  was  the  view  of  Mr.  Jefferson,  under  the  Confederation 
(vol.  I.  Life,  p.  398). 


358  RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

Indeed,  how  could  wars  be  prosecuted  for  wrongs  inflicted,  and  just 
indemnity  obtained,  if  any  conquests  of  territory  made  could  not  be 
held  ?  They  can.  be,  and  become  a  part  of  the  nation.  (1  Peters' 
Rep.,  p.  542.)  And  if  so,  are  we  to  treat  them,  in  due  time,  and  when 
fit,  as  equals  and  component  parts  of  the  Union,  or  exhibit  the 
shameful  injustice,  as  well  as  impolicy,  of  keeping  them  in  a  disfran- 
chised and  humiliating  servitude  ? 

In  3  Story  on  Con.,  193,  it  is  laid  down  that  "the  General  Govern- 
ment possesses  the  right  to  acquire  territory  by  conquest  or  by  treaty." 
Again,  190-1  :  "  The  constitutionality  of  the  two  former  acquisitions 
(Louisiana  and  Florida),  though  formerly  much  questioned,  is  now 
considered  settled  beyond  any  practical  doubt." 

It  was  objected,  in  1803,  that,  under  the  form  of  a  cession,  we  may 
become  united  to  a  more  powerful  neighbor  or  rival,  and  be  involved 
in  European  or  other  foreign  interests  and  contests  to  an  interminable 
extent,    (p.  157.) 

But  the  reply  was,  that  "the  right  to  acquire  territory  is  an  incident 
to  sovereignty."    (p.  159.) 

Every  government  that  ever  yet  existed  possesses  a  competency  to 
add  to  its  territory.  It  ceases  to  have  the  functions  of  an  independent 
nation,  if  it  cannot,  by  treaty  or  discovery,  obtain  new  boundaries  for 
convenience,  or  new  lands  for  culture,  or  new  ports  for  commerce ; 
and,  as  before  suggested,  it  is  stripped  of  the  national  function  of 
acquiring  territory,  when  assailed  by  unjust  war,  and  holding  it  either 
for  indemnity,  or  profit,  or  security.  And  if  we  can  acquire  it,  reason, 
as  well  as  the  words  of  the  constitution,  requires  us,  in  due  time,  to 
make  States  out  of  it,  and  admit  them  into  the  Union.  (160.)  Story 
says,  in  a  note  to  this  page,  that  the  Hartford  Convention  proposed 
to  prevent  such  admission,  unless  by  a  vote  of  two-thirds  of  both 
Houses ;  and,  by  a  report  in  that  body,  indirectly  denied  the  authority 
to  admit  States,  or  any  territory  without  our  original  limits.  But  this 
doctrine  has  slept  with  that  convention  since,  it  is  believed,  till  revived 
by  Mr.  Adams,  in  his  Texas  speech,  in  1838,  in  Congress,  and  his 
political  address  in  New  York,  in  1839. 

How  little  ground  exists  for  such  a  doctrine,  even  in  the  opinion  of 
the  greatest  constitutional  lawyer  of  his  own  party,  may  be  seen  by 
looking  to  3d  Story,  pages  160,  161 : 

"  Sec.  1283.  The  more  recent  acquisition  of  Florida,  which  has  been  universally 
approved  or  acquiesced  in  by  all  the  States,  can  be  maintained  only  on  the  same  prin- 
ciple, and  furnishes  a  striking  illustration  of  the  truth,  that  constitutions  of  govern- 
ment require  a  liberal  construction  to  effect  their  objects ;  and  that  a  narrow  inter- 
pretation of  their  powers,  however  it  may  suit  the  views  of  speculative  philosophers, 
or  the  accidental  interests  of  political  parties,  is  incompatible  with  the  permanent 
interest  of  the  State,  and  subversive  of  the  great  ends  of  all  government,  the  safety 
and  independence  of  the  people." 

This  construction  does  not,  as  the  senator  from  New  Jersey  argues, 
prevent  the  blessings  of  liberty  from  being  enjoyed  by  the  posterity 


KE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  359 

of  our  fathers  as  they  designed;  because  there  is  enough  at  the 
bounteous  table  for  all  that  posterity,  and  any  new  associates.  All 
such  can  participate  with  them  in  that  freedom,  as  they  do  in  the  air, 
water,  and  sun,  without  loss  to  either,  and  without  exclusiveness  and 
misanthropy. 

In  truth,  our  whole  history  serves  to  demonstrate  the  wisdom,  on 
general  as  well  as  constitutional  principles,  of  expanding  our  limits 
with  the  vast  increase  of  our  population  and  wealth.  Such  expansion 
prevents  many  of  the  evils  of  too  dense  a  population,  and  secures  the 
predominance  of  the  safe,  virtuous,  and  republican  pursuit  of  agricul- 
ture. It  is  said  that  we  have  a  Sparta,  and  let  us  adorn  it.  But  is 
there  never  to  be  an  escape  from  the  infant  shell,  nor  any  enlarge- 
ment of  the  shell  itself  to  suit  the  growth  of  the  animal  within  1  Is 
our  Sparta  to  be  confined  forever  to  a  garden  spot  or  single  planta- 
tion, a  single  city  or  a  few  barren  acres,  as  in  Greece,  with  iron  only 
for  money,  black  broth  only  for  food,  and  our  sons  taught  steal- 
ing as  an  accomplishment,  instead  of  spreading  over  half  a  continent, 
improving  the  sciences  and  the  whole  arts  of  the  civilized  world,  covering 
remotest  oceans  with  our  commerce,  and  helping  to  spread,  abroad  and 
at  home,  superior  education  and  a  purer  religion  ?  Thank  God,  the 
scales  fell  from  our  eyes  on  this  subject  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  cen- 
tury ago,  when  Louisiana  was  purchased ;  and,  instead  of  trying  to 
replace  them,  if  we  are  able  to  preserve  Oregon, —  gained  both  by  dis- 
covery and  purchase, —  and  to  recover  Texas,  we  can,  in  another  half- 
century,  not  only  again,  as  has  been  done,  double  our  States,  and 
nearly  quadruple  our  wealth,  numbers  and  power,  but  adorn,  improve, 
and  secure  forever,  all  the  fair  inheritance  with  which  we  are  blessed. 

When  we  look  to  analogies  abroad  of  cases  of  whole  territories  and 
governments  being  ceded  and  annexed  to  other  governments,  whether 
monarchies  or  republican  confederacies,  they  cluster  thickly. 

France  herself  is  made  up  of  a  union  of  what  was  once  different 
kingdoms.  So  of  Spain  ;  so  of  Great  Britain ;  so  of  Germany.  In- 
deed, England  not  only  re-annexed  Wales, —  the  favorite  and  just  term 
now, —  but  admitted  Scotland,  as  well  as  Ireland,  into  a  union  with  her, 
including  government  and  the  whole  territory.  The  word  re-annexed, 
as  now  applied,  is  as  old  as  Blackstone,  who  says  :  "  The  territory  of 
Wales  being  then  entirely  re-annexed  (by  a  kind  of  feudal  resump- 
tion) to  the  dominion  of  the  crown  of  England."     (Vol.  I.,  p.  94.) 

But,  in  confederacies,  Switzerland  has  added  and  rejected  various 
separate  cantonments,  with  their  whole  government  and  territory.  So 
of  Holland,  or  the  Netherlands ;  and  so  of  the  Mexican  confederacy 
itself,  now  including  one  State  formerly  attached  to  Guatemala ;  so  of 
Colombia ;  so  of  Buenos  Ayres ;  sometimes  adding  new  States,  both 
territory  and  government,  and  sometimes  amicably  or  violently  sepa- 
rating. Indeed,  several  of  the  old  thirteen  colonies,  now  States,  were 
originally  obtained  by  England  by  treaties  of  cession. 

In  the  Mexican  constitution  (see  2  Kennedy,  427),  the  power  of 


360  RE- ANNEXATION   OE  TEXAS. 

their  Congress  is  no  broader  than  ours.  It  is  to  admit  new  States  to 
the  Federal  Union  or  territories,  incorporating  them  in  the  nation ;  and 
under  it  one  has  been  admitted  which  never  before  belonged  in  any 
sense  to  Mexico. 

Hence,  whether  we  look  to  the  words  of  the  constitution,  or  to  the 
practice  under  it,  or  to  the  analogies  of  other  governments,  whether 
American  or  European,  the  constitutional  right  to  annex  is  undoubted. 

All  which  the  constitution  requires  to  admit  States  is  the  assent 
of  Congress.  Whether  a  treaty  is  also  necessary  to  annex  a  territory 
seems  questionable,  unless  it  is  regarded  as  done  by  a  contract  with  a 
foreign  power,  which  is  usually  commenced  in  the  form  of  a  treaty, 
and  the  terms  thus  settled  with  more  convenience  in  the  first  instance. 
But  there  can  be  little  doubt  that,  while  the  assent  of  Congress  is 
alone  sufficient,  and  is  alone  necessary  by  our  constitution  to  admit  a 
new  State,  it  is  proper  to  be  given,  after  a  territory  is  bought  by  treaty, 
to  the  payments  to  be  made  under  it,  and  to  the  organization  of  its 
new  government  and  relations ;  and,  if  so  given  without  a  treaty,  may 
answer  every  object  of  reason  and  principle  involved. 

But  the  idea  that,  in  these  cases  under  our  constitution,  it  is  neces- 
sary to  have  the  assent  of  each  State  in  the  Union  as  a  separate  State, 
or  the  people  of  each  (and,  indeed,  as  Mr.  Adams  supposed  in  1804, 
of  conventions  in  each  State, —  4  Elliott's  Debates),  except  as  both  are 
represented  in  Congress,  and  then  only  a  majority  of  their  representa- 
tives in  each  branch  to  a  law,  or  of  two-thirds  of  the  Senate  to  a 
treaty,  is  not  justified  either  by  any  language  or  precedent.  No  dif- 
ferent assent  than  this  last  was  asked  in  1803,  or  1811,  or  1819,  or 
any  other  occasion  whatever.  And  the  only  analogy  in  support  of  it 
seems  to  be  a  practice  in  Holland  to  require  the  assent  of  the  States 
separately  to  the  admission  of  new  States ;  when,  in  truth,  the 
practice  there  originated  in  an  express  clause  in  the  confederation  to 
that  effect.     (See  it  in  2d  Davies'  Hist,  of  Holland,  p.  76.) 

So  another  express  clause  in  the  old  Confederation  required  the 
assent  of  nine  States  out  of  thirteen,  in  certain  cases.  When  annexa- 
tion was  declined  in  1837,  it  was  on  other  grounds  ;  and  this  point  is 
explicitly  stated  by  Mr.  "Van  Buren,  who  was  then  President,  to  be 
no  objection.  In  a  constitutional  point  of  view,  the  opposition  "of  a 
considerable  and  respectable  portion  of  the  community"  as  others 
argue,  cannot  rightfully  defeat  annexation,  if  there  be  a  majority  of 
Congress  in  favor  of  the  measure ;  though  such  an  opposition,  and 
their  reasons,  would  be  entitled  to  respectful  consideration,  as  in  all 
other  controverted  cases.  I  admit  that  the  wishes  of  the  people 
should  possess  much  influence,  and  it  is  desirable  to  know  them  before 
action  on  important  measures ;  but  they  are  not,  by  the  constitution, 
required  to  be  first  consulted,  before  Congress  or  the  treaty-making 
power  can  negotiate  for  territory.  It  was  never  dreamed  of  in  the 
purchase  of  Louisiana  and  Florida,  nor  in  the  former  attempts  to 
purchase  Texas,  in  1825,  1829,  and  1835. 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  361 

But,  if  it  were  otherwise,  the  senator  from  Missouri  admits  that  ten 
or  twelve  millions,  out  of  fifteen  of  our  free  population,  are  in  favor  of 
the  annexation.  A  majority  of  more  than  two-thirds  here,  and  of  all 
the  voters  in  Texas  but  ninety- three,  as  stated  by  their  commissioners, 
would  then  seem  quite  enough  of  the  people  themselves,  in  both  coun- 
tries, to  satisfy  the  most  fastidious. 

How  much  some  gentlemen  are  likely  to  obtain  by  the  advice  of  the 
people  before  they  act,  however  it  is  wished,  can  be  ascertained  from 
the  extraordinary  resolution  to  throw  twenty  thousand  copies  of  the 
treaty  and  correspondence  before  the  public,  because  "the  will  of  the 
people  ought  to  be  consulted  on  them  ;"  and  yet  refusing  to  wait  a 
reasonable  time  to  learn  that  will,  and  proceeding,  the  very  next  day, 
before  a  single  copy  was  printed  for  the  people,  to  discuss  and  decide 
on  the  measure. 

On  motion  of  Mr.  Walker,  to  amend  the  amendment  proposed  by 
Mr.  Crittenden,  by  adding  at  the  end  thereof  the  following :  and  that 
a  reasonable  time  should  be  given  to  hear  from  the  people  after  this 
publication,  before  the  final  decision  of  the  Senate  upon  the  treaty — 

It  was  determined  in  the  negative, —  yeas  15,  nays  28. 

Having  endeavored  to  show  our  constitutional  right  to  purchase  the 
territory  of  Texas,  and  to  unite  its  people  in  our  government,  and 
having  thus  tried  to  remove  the  great  obstacle  to  the  ratification,  which 
blocks  up  the  threshold  of  our  inquiries,  I  shall  consider  the  next 
point,  which  is  the  right  of  Texas  to  make  the  cession,  and  enter  into 
the  Union.  The  objection  to  the  form  of  doing  this  business,  on  both 
sides,  I  will  examine  hereafter,  as  I  am  at  present  looking  merely  to 
the  great  principles  involved  in  the  authority  to  take  and  to  cede. 

It  is  contended  by  several  who  oppose  the  treaty,  that  Texas  is  not 
in  a  competent  condition  to  make  this  cession  without  the  assent  of 
Mexico  or  Spain, —  some  former  master  or  tyrannical  step-mother. 
Spain,  it  is  believed,  is  pretty  well  silenced  on  this  point  by  the  great 
lapse  of  time  since  she  has  made  any  war  on  the  territory  of  Texas, 
and  any  claim  to  govern  her ;  or  she  is  silenced  by  her  recognition  of 
the  independence  of  all  her  American  provinces.  But  how  is  it  with 
Mexico  ?  On  what  rest  her  claims  to  be  consulted  before  the  cession, 
so  far  as  regards  the  power  and  capacity  of  Texas  ? 

In  the  first  place,  the  right  of  Mexico  to  Texas  as  ever  having  been 
an  integral  portion  of  her  territory,  and  much  less  a  portion  of  it  since 
the  independence  of  Mexico  herself  was  acknowledged  by  Spain,  is 
very  questionable. 

According  to  the  opinions  of  such  jurists  and  diplomatists  as  Jeffer- 
son, Madison,  and  Monroe, — of  Livingston,  Clay,  and  Adams  (in 
1818), —  Texas  was  within  the  limits  of  Louisiana,  when  bought  by 
us  in  1803,  as  clearly  "as  the  island  of  New  Orleans."  I  shall  not 
fatigue  the  Senate  with  details  on  this.  But  Texas  had  been  discov- 
ered and  settled  by  the  French  in  1685,  five  years  previous  to  any 
Spanish  settlement.  (Marbois'  Hist,  of  Louisiana,  107.)  It  had  been 
31 


362  RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS. 

viewed  as  ''the  cradle  of  Louisiana."  (4  Jeff.  Life,  60.)  It  was  in 
the  grant  by  Louis  to  Crozat,  in  1712.  (1  Laws,  439.)  After  ceded 
to  Spain,  in  1761,  its  boundaries  became  unimportant;  but  when 
retroceded  to  and  occupied  by  France,  in  1800,  she  claimed  as  for- 
merly, and  delivered  it  to  us  by  her  officers,  in  1804,  as  extending 
west  to  the  Rio  del  Norte.  It  was  boasted  by  Don  Onis,  the  Spanish 
minister,  who  negotiated  the  treaty  of  1819,  after  his  return,  that  by 
his  ability  and  tact  it  had  been  procured  from  us.  Mr.  Forsyth  to 
Adams,  July  30,  1820,  says  that  Don  Onis  "  endeavors  to  show  that 
the  treaty  of  cession  of  Florida  ought  to  be  considered  as  a  treaty 
of  exchange  of  Florida  for  Texas,  a  country  more  extensive,  fertile, 
and  valuable."  The  Spanish  government  itself  seems  to  have 
instructed  their  minister  that  we  might  retain  it,  if  no  better  terms 
could  be  procured.  (See  Erving's  Expose.)  And  Mr.  Gallatin,  after 
laborious  research,  before  1810,  became  convinced  the  territory  was 
ours ;  and  our  posts  had,  therefore,  as  early  as  1806,  been  extended 
beyond  the  Sabine  to  Nacogdoches,  one  of  the  remotest  settlements  of 
much  size.  (1  Laws,  437.)  And  Galveston  itself  was  temporarily 
occupied  by  us,  in  1817.  (4  State  Papers,  297.  See  more  fully  on 
this,  Marbois'  History  of  Louisiana;  4  State  Papers;  4  Jeff.  Life, 
60 ;  2  Foote's  History  of  Texas,  397,  376 ;  1  do.,  194  ;  2  Kennedy, 
445  ;  1  Clay's  Speeches,  82  and  93.) 

Under  what  pretence,  then,  can  Mexico  claim  it?  In  1819  we 
ceded  it  to  Spain,  not  Mexico ;  and  if,  as  some  incorrectly  maintain, 
Mexico  was  then  revolutionized,  she  of  course  got  nothing  by  this  sub- 
sequent cession  to  Spain  rather  than  herself.  But  if,  as  was  the 
truth,  Mexico  never  became  independent  of  Spain,  even  by  declaration, 
till  February  24,  1821,  though  before  torn  by  intestine  divisions,  all 
avowing  loyalty  to  Spain,  she  claimed  her  independence  only  two  days 
after  the  treaty  of  1819  was  finally  ratified  by  us,  and  before  Spain 
was  notified  thereof,  or  had  taken  possession  of  the  territory,  or  had 
annexed  it  to  Mexico ;  and  months  before  Mexico  got  possession  of  the 
government  of  the  country. 

This  is  one  view  of  the  weakness  of  the  claim  of  Mexico.  Another 
is,  that  Spain  had  previously  made  claim  to  Texas;  and,  "under 
the  Spanish  government,  Texas  was  a  separate  and  distinct  province. 
As  such,  it  had  a  separate  and  distinct  local  organization."  (See  1 
Foote's  History  of  Texas,  p.  62.)  When,  therefore,  her  people, 
between  1821  and  1824,  revolted  from  old  Spain  and  declared  them- 
selves independent,  and  formed  a  new  constitution  and  political  organ- 
ization, whether  always  before  belonging  to  Spain,  or  given  to  her  by 
our  cession  in  1819,  they  acted  as  a  separate,  free,  sovereign  and 
independent  State,  as  much  as  did  New  Hampshire  or  South 
Carolina  in  1776.  Then,  fifteen  thousand  people,  probably  (besides 
Indians),  occupied  her  territory.  As  such,  she  continued  in  a  revolu- 
tionary condition,  till,  Iturbide  being  shot,  she  joined  the  Mexican  con- 
federacy, with  Coahuila,  in  1824 ;  and,  with  her,  as  a  separate  inde- 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  363 

pendent  State,  continued  in  the  confederation,  under  certain  specified 
terms,  till  1834  and  1835  ;  though  she  wished  a  separate  State  govern- 
ment in  1832,  having,  in  October  of  that  year,  held  a  separate  conven- 
tion from  Coahuila,  to  form  a  separate  constitution,  and  blocked  one 
out ;  and  sent  Austin  with  it  and  a  petition  to  Mexico,  setting  forth 
the  reasons  for  separation.  (2  Kennedy,  19  to  22.)  He  proved 
unsuccessful,  and  was  imprisoned ;  and,  in  1834  and  1835,  when  the 
confederated  rights  of  Texas  were  violated  by  Santa  Anna,  her  peo- 
ple oppressed,  her  State  legislature  abolished,  and  the  confederacy 
dissolved,  a  consolidated  government  was  erected  on  its  ruins,  October 
5th,  1835,  and  she  refused,  as  was  her  sovereign  right,  to  enter  into 
the  new  government.  (See  the  decree,  2  Kennedy,  111,  89,  61.)  She 
continued  during  1835  to  contend  manfully  against  the  usurper,  and 
to  sustain  her  independent  rights,  till  the  final  victory  of  San  Jacinto, 
in  April  (26th),  1836,  crowned  her  efforts. 

Her  constitution,  early  as  March  11th,  1827,  and  while  in  the 
confederacy  with  Mexico,  used  this  emphatic  language:  Texas  "is 
free  and  independent  of  the  other  United  Mexican  States,  and  of  every 
other  foreign  power  and  dominion."  (See  2  Kennedy's  H.,  444  p., 
Ap.)  And  again :  after  stating  that  she  has  joined  the  confederacy  for 
certain  specified  purposes,  the  constitution  declares  that,  for  all  others, 
Texas  "  retains  its  liberty,  independence,  and  sovereignty." 

What  justifiable  pretence,  then,  has  there  been  since,  for  Mexico  to 
attempt  to  dragoon  a  separate  and  independent  State  into  a  new  form 
of  government,  or  into  subjection  to  her  tyranny  ?  What  right  of 
Mexico  has  she  violated  ?  The  wrong  is  on  the  other  side  ;  and  it  is 
Mexico,  to  whom  she  owes  neither  duties  nor  allegiance,  that  is  usurp- 
ing a  control  over  her  affairs  not  justifiable  either  by  sound  principles 
of  constitutional  law  or  the  great  axioms  on  which  the  right  of  our 
own  States  and  their  people  rest. 

Let  it  be  remembered,  also,  that  Texas,  beside  being  an  independent 
sovereign  State  ever  since  the  original  revolution  in  1821,  and  the  first 
Mexican  constitution  of  1824,  had  entirely  separated  from  the  confed- 
eracy, when  it  was  dissolved  in  1835,  as  she  had  a  right  to,  one  to 
two  years  before  the  independence  of  Mexico  herself  was  acknowledged 
by  Spain,  in  December,  1836. 

Texas  had  attempted  independence,  and  half  a  year  after,  at  San 
Jacinto,  resisted  Mexican  occupation  and  control ;  and  hence,  may  not 
have  been  included  in  Spain's  recognition  of  Mexico  alone. 

Bring  these  facts  home  to  our  own  system  of  government.  Look  at 
the  analogies  and  rights.  Read  the  eloquent  and  indignant  remon- 
strances of  Texas  against  the  assumed  authority  over  her,  in  her  new 
declaration  of  independence,  and  new  constitution,  in  1836,  and  our 
hearts  cannot  but  burn  within  us  at  the  worse  than  British  dictation 
and  oppression  which  are  claimed  and  attempted  to  be  exercised  over 
her  ;  and  if  cause  of  just  war  exists  at  all,  it  is  on  the  part  of  Texas, 
and  against  Mexico,  rather  than  the  reverse. 


364  RE-ANNEXATION    OF   TEXAS. 

But  if  any  consider  this  view  of  the  case  as  in  some  respects  not 
tenable,  we  invite  their  attention  to  another  aspect  of  the  subject, 
which  strengthens  much  the  right  of  Texas  to  make  this  cession,  and 
be  received  into  the  Union,  and  enjoy  all  its  benefits,  as  proposed  by 
this  treaty. 

When  we  purchased  Texas  within  the  limits  of  Louisiana,  in  1808, 
we  engaged,  by  treaty  with  France,  to  perform  the  solemn  duties  set 
out  in  the  third  article,  first  Laws,  p.  136. 

"  The  inhabitants  of  the  ceded  territory  shall  be  incorporated  in  the  Union  of  the 
United  States,  and  admitted  as  soon  as  possible,  according  to  the  principles  of  the 
federal  constitution,  to  all  the  rights,  advantages,  and  immunities,  of  citizens  of  the 
United  States  i  and,  in  the  mean  time,  they  shall  be  maintained  and  protected  in  the 
free  enjoyment  of  their  liberty,  property,  and  the  religion  which  they  profess." 

Now,  if  any  of  the  people  of  Texas  reside  on  territory  then  within 
the  boundaries  of  Louisiana,  this  obligation  remains  in  full  force,  unless 
France  has  released  us  from  it,  or  those  people  have  relinquished  it, 
and  do  not  now  desire  its  fulfilment. 

I  concede  that  we  may  have  done  acts  which  bar  or  estop  us,  both 
morally  and  politically,  from  making  any  further  rightful  claim  over 
them,  against  their  consent;  but  have  they  ever  become  constitutionally 
divested  of  their  right  under  that  treaty  provision  1 

I  have  already  proved  that  the  territory  of  Texas  was  geographically 
within  the  limits  of  Louisiana ;  and  whatever  may  be  her  present  true 
boundaries,  it  is  well  known  that  the  people  of  Texas  now  asking 
admission  reside  on  that  part  of  her  territory  conceded  by  all  not  to 
be  west  or  north  of  her  old  limits. 

The  obligation  imposed  on  us  in  1803,  then, — how  have  we  become 
exonerated  from  it  ?  In  no  way,  I  apprehend,  unless  by  the  treaty 
made  with  Spain  in  1819,  ceding  all  our  territory  west  of  the  Sabine, 
and  thus  ceding  away  Texas  herself.  To  understand  the  precise  char- 
acter of  that  treaty,  it  is  necessary  to  notice  that  it  was  not,  as  many 
have  hastily  supposed,  a  treaty  merely  defining,  with  particularity, 
limits  before  general  and  uncertain  between  contiguous  nations. 

But,  turning  to  the  third  article  (6  Laws,  616),  it  will  be  seen  that, 
after  describing  a  line  north  from  the  mouth  of  the  Sabine,  and  then 
north-west  and  west  to  the  South  Sea,  "the  United  States  hereby 
CEDE  to  his  Catholic  Majesty,  and  RENOUNCE  forever,  all  their 
rights,  claims,  and  pretensions,  to  the  territories  lying  west  and  south 
of  the  above-described  line ;  and,  in  like  manner,  his  Catholic  Majesty 
cedes  to  the  said  United  States  all  his  rights,  claims,  and  pretensions, 
to  any  territories  east  and  north  of  the  said  line ;  and  for  himself,  his 
heirs  and  successors,  renounces  all  claims  to  the  said  territories  for- 


ever." 


Besides  fixing  some  boundaries  before  doubtful,  the  treaty  of  1819 
was  thus  manifestly  one  of  cession  ;  as  much  so,  on  our  part,  of  Texas, 
as  on  the  part  of  Spain  of  the  Floridas,  the  same  language  being  used 
in  both  cases.    The  territory  then  being  very  large,  and  its  inhabitants 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  365 

several  thousands,  it  was  neither  constitutional  nor  right  to  cede  them 
away,  and  deprive  them  of  their  claims  to  be  admitted  into  our  Union 
under  the  Louisiana  treaty,  without  first  asking  and  obtaining  their 
consent.  Neither  of  these  was  done ;  and  whatever  acts  they  have 
since  passed,  under  a  supposition  that  their  claim  had  by  us  been 
legally  extinguished,  are  not  to  injure  or  debar  them,  in  forum  con- 
scientice, — in  sound  morals  or  just  principles, — from  now  request- 
ing, as  they  virtually  do  by  this  treaty,  a  reunion  and  admission  to  all 
the  privileges  before  stipulated  to  be  allowed  them.  These  positions 
are  so  important  as  to  justify  some  further  proofs  that  the  treaty  of 
1819  was  then  regarded  on  both  sides  as  one  of  cession.  The  message 
of  Mr.  Monroe,  in  December,  1819,  says  "we  had  ceded  valuable 
territory ;"  and  Mr.  Clay,  in  1820,  declares  that  we  unadvisably 
ceded  the  country  west  of  the  Sabine  to  the  Rio  Del  Norte.  So 
Mr.  Adams,  before  the  ratifications  wTere  completed  (May  3d,  1820,  4 
State  Papers,  684),  says  of  the  United  States,  "their  right  of  terri- 
tory was,  and  yet  is,  to  the  Rio  Del  Norte;"  and  (in  February, 
1821),  "these  concessions  on  the  part  of  the  United  States  were 
great ;  and  the  treaty  was  a  treaty  of  l  mutual  cessions '  (4  State 
Papers,  703)  ;  in  the  words  of  Don  Onis,  it  was  a  treaty  of  exchange 
of  Florida  for  Texas,  —  a  country  more  extensive,  fertile,  and  valu- 
able." 

The  propriety  of  that  exchange  or  cession  is  a  very  different  ques- 
tion ;  and,  however  proper  most  of  it  may,  as  early  as  1806,  have 
seemed  justifiable  to  one  House  of  Congress,  and  the  whole  of  it  advis- 
able to  all  of  the  other  House,  and  the  President,  in  1819,  yet  with 
the  knowledge  we  now  possess  of  the  value  of  Texas,  and  the  land 
ceded  on  the  sources  of  the  Red  river  and  the  Arkansas,  as  well  as  of 
the  better  terms  which  might  probably  have  been  procured  of  Spain, 
the  cession  is  much  to  be  regretted. 

But  before  complaining  too  severely  of  those  who  participated  in  the 
making  of  the  treaty,  and  in  its  ratification,  by  having  obliged  us  not 
only  to  pay  five  millions  of  dollars  for  Florida, — a  country  that  has  been 
called  mere  sand-banks  and  swamps, — but  to  cede  the  whole  of  Texas, 
larger  and  richer  than  three  Floridas,  it  may  be  well  to  advert  to  one 
or  two  considerations.  The  title  of  what  we  ceded  was  controverted, 
however  improperly ;  but  that  of  what  we  obtained  was  uncontroverted. 
The  extent  and  character  of  Texas  were  then  little  known  or  appre- 
ciated ;  while  the  importance  of  the  possession  of  Florida  by  us,  with 
a  view  to  the  free  navigation  of  the  Mobile  and  Apalachicola,  was 
thoroughly  understood,  as  well  as  its  benefits  to  the  rich  countries 
above,  of  having  American  depots  and  outlets  for  their  produce  near 
the  ocean,  and  additional  guards  to  the  domestic  tranquillity  of  the 
south,  and  the  security  of  her  peculiar  property  and  institutions.  These 
circumstances  induced  Mr.  Jefferson,  as  early  as  the  attempt  to  buy 
Louisiana,  to  seek  to  obtain  the  Floridas  also.  (4  State  Papers, 
738—9.) 

31* 


366  KE-AKNTEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

It  is  not  a  little  curious  that,  in  the  original  instructions,  they 
extended  only  to  the  buying  of  that  part  of  Louisiana  consisting  of  the 
island  of  New  Orleans,  or  all  east  of  the  Mississippi,  and  including, 
at  the  same  time,  the  Floridas ;  but  neither  Texas  nor  anything  else 
west  of  the  Mississippi.  (See  Doc.  102.  19th  Con.,  1st  "session,  to 
the  Senate,  dated  20th  May,  1824.  The  following  numbers  refer  to 
letters  in  that  document :  Nos.  462,  460,  466,  468,  471,  and  476. 
See  also  2  State  Papers,  pages  537,  541,  516,  520,  and  529.) 

The  value  put  there  on  the  different  objects  of  purchase  is  signifi- 
cant, as  for  New  Orleans  alone  the  minister  was  to  give  three-fourths 
of  the  whole  sum,  and  for  the  Floridas  the  other  fourth ;  but  only 
half  as  much  for  East  as  for  West  Florida,  if  obtaining  but  one  of 
them.  (See  page  743,  Doc.  102.)  At  one  time  we  even  proposed 
to  guarantee  to  Spain  the  west  side  of  the  Mississippi  (Madison  to 
Pinckney,  May  11th,  1802,  No.  462,  as  above),  should  she  cede  to 
the  east  side. 

The  cession  of  the  whole  province  of  Louisiana  was  rather  a  pro- 
posal from  Bonaparte,  than  ours  ; — fearing  lest,  in  an  approaching  war 
with  England,  she  might  seize  the  rest ;  and  urging,  as  a  reason  for 
it,  that  the  rest,  if  not  wanted  by  us,  could  be  sold  by  us  to  some 
other  power.  (2  State  Papers,  552,  Livingston  to  Madison,  No.  476, 
in  document  above.)  How  fully  and  authentically  does  this  fact  repel 
all  the  libellous  imputations  then  and  since  made  against  Mr.  Jefferson 
and  us,  for  seeking  Louisiana  (including  Texas)  from  ambition  and 
the  love  of  aggrandizement !  But  after  Louisiana  was  obtained  with- 
out Florida,  the  latter  was  still  regarded  as  so  essential,  that,  on  a 
message  by  Mr.  Jefferson,  of  a  confidential  character,  in  January, 
1806,  Congress  itself,  in  secret  session,  matured  a  law  appropriating 
two  millions  of  dollars  to  enable  him  to  make  the  purchase  ;  and  the 
object  of  the  law  was  concealed  from  foreign  scrutiny  and  intrigue,  by 
entitling  it  "  An  act  to  defray  any  extraordinary  expense  which  may 
be  incurred  in  the  foreign  intercourse  between  the  United  States  and 
foreign  nations."     (4  Laws,  p.  5,  February  13,  1806.) 

In  order  to  aid  in  that  negotiation,  the  following  memorable  resolu- 
tions were  passed  in  the  House  of  Representatives,  in  secret  session ; 
and  are,  in  truth,  I  apprehend,  the  whole  foundation  of  the  subsequent 
cession  of  Texas  in  1819,  whose  demerits  have  been  the  object  of  so 
much  animadversion.  There  had  been  instructions  before  to  make 
the  Colorado  the  western  boundary,  if  every  difficulty  could  thus  be 
adjusted  with  Spain,  and  the  Floridas  obtained;  but  an  absolute 
refusal  to  cede  any  part  of  Texas  or  Louisiana  east  of  the  Colorado. 
(See  fully  on  this  2  State  Papers,  pages  626  to  666,  containing  let- 
ters from  July,  1803,  to  May,  1805,  to  and  from  our  ministers  at 
Madrid.) 

Here  are  the  resolutions  : 

"Resolved,  That r  dollars  be  appropriated  by  law  towards  defraying  the 

expenses  which  may  be  incurred  in  the  purchase  of  the  Spanish  territories  lying  on 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  367 

the  Atlantic  Ocean  and  Gulf  of  Mexico,  and  eastward  of  the  Mississippi,  to  be  paid 
out  of  any  money  in  the  treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated,  and  to  be  applied  under 
the  direction  of  the  President  of  the  United  States,  who  shall  have  authority,  if  neces- 
sary, to  borrow  the  said  sum,  or  any  part  thereof,  in  behalf  of  the  United  States,  at 
a  rate  of  interest  not  exceeding  six  per  centum  per  annum,  redeemable  at  will ;  and 
shall  cause  an  account  thereof  to  be  laid  before  Congress,  as  soon  as  may  be. 

"Resolved,  That  an  exchange  of  territory  between  the  United  States  and  Spain  is 
deemed  by  this  House  to  be  the  most  advantageous  mode  of  settlement  of  existing  dif- 
ferences respecting  limits  between  the  United  States  and  the  court  of  Madrid  ;  and 
that  any  arrangement  between  the  two  governments  which  shall  secure  to  Spain  an 
ample  barrier  on  the  side  of  Mexico,  and  to  the  United  States  the  countries  watered  by 
the  Mississippi,  and  to  the  eastward  of  it,  will  meet  the  approbation  of  this  House." 
(See  House  Journal  for  January  14,  1806,  Appendix,  pages  437  and  458.) 

The  negotiation  was  at  once  renewed,  with  a  view  to  buy  the  Flor- 
idas,  or  get  them  in  exchange,  on  those  or  better  terms.  (See  3  State 
Papers,  pp.  539  and  540,  March  13,  1806,  Madison  to  Bowdoin.) 

In  truth,  so  vital  to  self-preservation  and  peace  was  the  possession 
of  them  regarded,  not  only  in  1806,  but  in  1811,  that  the  forcible 
occupation  of  it  in  the  latter  year  was  authorized  by  Congress,  as 
will  soon  be  more  fully  explained.  And  again,  in  1820,  Mr.  Monroe 
advised  another  forcible  occupation,  if  Spain  longer  refused  to  ratify 
the  treaty  of  cession  in  1819,  which  the  Senate  had  already  ratified 
unanimously.  After  this  retrospect,  and  much  more  that  need  not 
now  be  detailed,  I  can  readily  conceive  that,  not  only  in  1806,  but  in 
1819,  when  the  extent  and  value  of  Texas  were  less  known  than  now, 
and  when  the  Floridas  were  so  much  nearer  some  of  the  old  and  well- 
settled  States,  and  their  possession  so  highly  appreciated  on  other 
accounts  than  their  soil,  —  that  such  a  resolution  could  be  easier 
passed  by  Congress,  and  easier  complied  with  by  the  executive,  than 
now. 

In  the  then  infancy  of  the  republic,  and  the  comparative  ignorance 
of  the  sources  of  some  of  the  tributaries  of  the  Mississippi  and  the  vast 
western  extent  of  Louisiana,  the  west  side  of  that  river  was  much  lower 
appreciated  than  it  deserved ;  and  only  one  State  was  contemplated  to 
be  established  on  that  side,  and  a  large  reserved  territory  to  be  held 
for  the  Indians.     (4  Jeff.  Life,  51.) 

But,  we  had  hardly  parted  with  Texas,  before  the  explorations  and 
enterprise  of  our  people,  under  the  blessings  of  peace,  unfolded  more 
as  to  the  extent  and  fertility  of  that  region,  and  the  remote  sources  of 
many  of  our  beautiful  rivers ;  and  it  was  soon  discovered  that  we  had 
failed  to  retain  even  what  Congress  had  originally  intended  in  the  res- 
olution should  not  be  ceded, — that  is,  all  the  land  on  all  the  tributaries 
of  the  Mississippi. 

A  large  and  valuable  tract  on  the  Red  and  Arkansas  rivers  was 
parted  with,  either  through  want  of  correct  geographical  information, 
or  other  causes  now  unknown,  and  conflicting  with  the  resolution. 

Hence,  in  a  few  months,  inquiries  arose  in  Congress  whether  more 
had  not  been  ceded  than  was  proper ;  and  a  resolution  was  offered  by 
Dr.  Floyd,  to  ascertain  if  Spain  had  not  empowered  her  minister  to 


368  RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS. 

go  further  west  with  the  line,  and  if  that  fact  was  not  kno^n  to  the 
Secretary  of  State.  (Journal  of  House  of  Representatives,  January 
27,  1820,  p.  176—7.) 

Hence,  too,  as  soon  as  April,  1820,  Mr.  Clay  offered  the  resolu- 
tions now  in  my  hands,  calling  in  question  the  legality  of  the  cession, 
as  well  as  its  expediency.     I  will  read  the  first  one : 

"  Resolved,  That  the  constitution  of  the  United  States  vests  in  Congress  the  power 
to  dispose  of  the  territory  belonging  to  them  ;  and  that  no  treaty  purporting  to  alien- 
ate any  part  thereof  is  valid,  without  the  concurrence  of  Congress." 

Hence,  not  only  were  efforts  made  by  him  and  Mr.  Adams,  as  early 
as  1825,  to  regain  the  whole  country  by  a  purchase  from  Mexico,  and 
again  in  1827,  and  again  in  1829  by  General  Jackson  and  Mr.  Van 
Buren,  and  thenceforward  till  1835,  when  Texas  declared  her  inde- 
pendence, but,  in  the  Senate,  Mr.  Preston,  in  1838,  offered  another 
resolution,  that  the  original  cession  in  1819  was  "of  evil  precedent, 
and  questionable  constitutionality." 

Without  going  further  now  into  the  historical  data  connected  with 
this  branch  of  the  inquiry,  it  must  be  evident  that,  if  the  cession  in 
1819  was  void  from  any  cause,  Texas,  being  within  the  original  limits 
of  Louisiana,  ought  now  to  be,  under  the  stipulations  of  the  treaty  of 
1803,  protected  in  her  religion,  indulged  in  all  the  rights  of  American 
citizens,  and  as  soon  as  possible  admitted  into  the  Union  on  equal 
terms  with  all  other  new  States.  I  do  not  go  for  technicalities  for  or 
against  this  view  of  the  subject ;  nor  am  I  disposed  to  allow  little  spe- 
cial pleading,  by  estoppels  or  forms,  to  prevail  against  her  moral 
claims  on  us, — her  substantial  and  legitimate  rights.  How  are  the 
merits,  then  ?  France  has  never  released  us  from  the  obligation,  in  the 
treaty  with  her,  to  admit  into  the  Union  all  the  territory  then  within 
the  limits  of  Louisiana.  Texas  has  never  been  asked  to  release  us. 
Could  we,  then,  become  exonerated  by  our  own  acts  alone  ?  Certainly 
not,  as  we  are  out  one  party  to  the  contract. 

No  principle  is  better  settled  than  that  a  government  of  limited 
powers,  having  once  acquired  territory,  or  admitted  States  into  its 
Union,  cannot  sell  portions  of  them  to  foreign  powers.  There  is  no 
such  grant  in  the  instrument, — there  is  no  such  practice.  The  dis- 
posal of  the  fee  in  wild  land  to  individuals  and  companies  is  all  the 
power  in  selling  territories  or  States  which  has  been  exercised,  in  other 
cases,  under  this  authority.  But  in  no  case  has  the  jurisdiction  or 
sovereignty  over  the  people  in  territories  and  States,  whether  few  and 
small  or  numerous  and  large,  ever  been  exercised,  without  that  express 
assent  of  the  parties  in  interest  previously  obtained,  which,  on  element- 
ary principles,  can  confer  any  right,  or  ratify  any  transaction.  Here 
the  territory  was  large  enough  to  be  consulted,  and  its  population, — it 
being,  beside  Indians,  quite  fifteen  thousand,  probably,  in  1819.  It 
had  been  seven  thousand  when  Pike  visited  there,  twelve  years  pre- 
vious.    Hence,  while  Vermont  would  be  admitted  into  the  Union  by 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  369 

the  assent  of  a  majority  in  Congress,  after  1789,  yet  we  did  not  con- 
sider Congress,  or  the  President  and  the  Senate,  competent  to  cede  a 
part  of  the  territory  of  Maine,  in  1842,  without  asking  her  previous 
consent.  Hence,  early  as  1793,  Mr.  Jefferson,  and  others  of  General 
Washington's  cabinet,  doubted  whether  any  part  of  the  north-western 
territory  could  be  ceded  even  to  the  Indians,  and  much  less  its  juris- 
diction to  any  foreign  power.  (See  1  Jefferson's  Life,  page  409.  4 
Jefferson's  Life,  page  479.) 

The  old  Congress  of  1786  (4  Secret  Journal,  page  100)  held  that 
the  United  States  possessed  no  power,  by  a  treaty,  to  convey  a  part  or 
parts  of  the  territory  of  the  United  States  west  of  the  Alleghanies ; 
and  Vattel  (book  1,  chapter  21,  section  260)  holds,  that  only  the 
nation,  or  its  representatives,  and  not  the  prince,  or  treaty-making 
power,  can  cede  territory ;  and  it  seems  well  settled  .  in  England, 
that  no  part  of  the  realm  can  be  dismembered  or  alienated,  without  the 
consent  of  parliament,  as  well  as  of  the  king.  (Book  116,  chapter  2, 
section  10.)  Mr.  Sheffley,  in  debate  (National  Intelligencer,  Janu- 
ary 5,  1811),  pronounced  the  opposite  view,  as  to  a  part  of  a  State, 
"  a  doctrine  spurned  at  by  all." 

Mr.  Clay  maintained,  in  1820,  that  it  could  not  be  done  without 
the  assent  of  Congress ;  but  the  better  opinion  is,  that  the  territory  or 
State  ceded  must  consent,  and  not  Congress  alone. 

The  cession,  then,  of  both  jurisdiction  and  soil  in  Texas,  in  1819, 
without  the  previous  consent  of  its  actual  inhabitants  or  territorial 
government,  was  irregular  and  imperfect.  Whatever  subsequent  acts 
might  be  regarded  as  a  technical  acquiescence  in  the  cession,  it  was 
still,  in  point  of  law,  erroneous,  and  must  be  a  departure  from  treaty 
stipulations,  unless  we  now,  when  requested,  admit  them  to  all  the 
privileges  originally  promised.  There  can  be  no  doubt,  if  these  posi- 
tions are  well  supported,  that  they  are  fully  competent  to  ask  our 
assent  to  the  retrocession  and  reunion ;  and  thus,  without  regard  to 
forms,  do  in  substance  all  which  is  necessary  on  their  part  to  perfect 
the  measure.  But,  while  contending  for  this  in  their  behalf,  on  great 
principles  of  moral  and  political  obligation,  I  would  not  do  injustice  to 
any  other  power  with  whom  we  inadvertently  made  new  and  incom- 
patible engagements.  Though  those  engagements  are,  according  to 
Vattel,  inoperative, — the  first  treaty  being  valid  over  a  subsequent  one 
which  conflicts  with  it, — yet  any  injury  done  by  annulling  the  subse- 
quent cession  ought  to  be  remunerated  to  the  party  suffering.  But 
that  party,  whether  Spain  or  Mexico,  have  now  no  cause  of  complaint, 
and  suffer  no  loss  by  this  construction ;  because,  since  that  cession  in 
1819,  and  while  it  remained  de  facto  in  force,  Spain,  in  December, 
1836,  relinquished  all  her  claims  over  Mexico,  if  not  Texas ;  and  the 
latter  has  been  independent  of  Spain  for  more  than  twenty  years,  and 
for  more  than  ten  years  has  resisted  the  usurpations  of  Mexico  over 
her  rights  as  a  separate  and  sovereign  State,  and  for  eight  years  has 
declared  and  maintained  her  independence  as  to  the  whole  world. 


370  RE- ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

There  "will  be,  then,  a  great  moral  fitness  and  beauty  in  the  disposi- 
tion of  human  affairs,  if  now,  after  the  lapse  of  a  whole  generation,  we 
should  be  able,  by  the  re-annexation  of  Texas,  to  meet  the  wishes  of 
her  people  in  being  admitted  to  the  blessings  of  our  Union,  and 
should,  at  the  same  time,  fulfil  our  own  previous  treaty  stipulations  in 
their  favor ;  and,  without  injury  to  any  rights  of  others,  should  regain 
a  territory  so  vital  to  so  many  interests  of  all  sections,  and  so  long 
and  so  devoutly  sought  for  by  such  a  succession  of  statesmen  and 
patriots. 

The  solemnity  or  inviolability  of  the  treaty  of  1803  is  quite  as 
great  as  that  of  1819  or  1828,  or  any  other  since,  and  its  obligations 
on  this  subject  are  both  prior  and  paramount. 

But,  supposing  that  both  these  views  are  untenable, —  and,  for  the 
sake  of  argument,  indulging  a  moment  in  the  idea  that  Texas  was  not 
embraced  within  the  limits  of  Louisiana,  or,  if  so,  was  legally  ceded  to 
Spain,  and  afterwards  became  an  integral  part  of  the  Mexican  empire, — 
had  she  not,  when  the  terms  of  her  confederacy  with  that  government 
became  wantonly  violated,  her  citizens  imprisoned,  and  her  privileges 
outraged, —  had  she  not  a  right  to  assert  and  maintain  her  independ- 
ence 1  Would  she  not  have  been  false  to  her  American  blood,  not  to 
have  done  it  on  the  field  of  San  Jacinto,  as  well  as  down  to  the  pres- 
ent moment? 

Among  the  long  list  of  grievances  and  usurpations  set  out  in  the 
declaration  of  her  independence  (Senate  document,  No.  415,  June  23, 
1836),  was  this:  that  Mexico  "has  dissolved,  by  force  of  arms,  the 
State  Congress  of  Coahuila  and  Texas,"  as  well  as  denied  liberty  of 
conscience,  and  committed  piracies  on  her  commerce.  For  such  as 
these  she  made  that  declaration,  and  has  since  sustained  it  with  the 
rifle  and  the  bayonet. 

On  the  American  system  of  politics,  had  she  not  a  right  to  separate, 
for  such  abuses  and  violations  of  duty  on  the  part  of  Mexico  1  Listen 
to  the  doctrine, —  which  some  seem  to  forget,  but  which  is  laid  down 
in  our  own  Declaration  of  Independence, — on  this  subject,  penned 
by  Jefferson,  and  sanctioned  by  Franklin,  Hancock,  Adams,  and  their 
patriot  coadjutors : 

"When  a  long  train  of  abuses  and  usurpations,  pursuing  invariably4  the  same 
object,  evinces  a  design  to  reduce  them  (the  people)  under  absolute  despotism,  it  is 
their  right,  it  is  their  duty,  to  throw  off  such  government,  and  to  provide  new  guards 
for  their  future  security." 

What  is  the  American  system,  as  adopted  by  my  native  State,  and 
most  of  the  others  in  the  Union  1 

"  The  people  of  this  State  have  the  sole  and  exclusive  right  of  governing  them- 
selves, as  a  free,  sovereign,  and  independent  State,"  &c. 

"  All  government  of  right  originates  from  the  people." 

"  Whenever  the  ends  of  the  government  are  perverted,  or  public  liberty  manifestly 
endangered,  and  all  other  modes  of  redress  are  ineffectual,  the  people  may,  and  of 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  371 

right  ought  to,  reform  the  old,  or  establish  a  new  government."     (See  the  New 
Hampshire  constitution.) 

See  also  2  Barlemaque,  p.  128,  stating  that  a  people  may,  for  a 
good  cause,  always  revolt  and  change  their  government. 

Mr.  Clay's  speech  on  the  recognition  of  the  independence  of  South 
America,  and  Mr.  Webster's  on  that  of  Greece,  are  full  of  these  doc- 
trines, however  heretical  their  views  may  be  on  some  other  questions. 

By  this  (the  true  American  system  of  politics)  man  is  regarded  as 
a  free  agent,  possessing  a  right  to  self-government.  We  hold  that 
communities  may  not  only  change  their  form  of  polity,  but  divide  and 
erect  a  separate  institution,  when  oppressed,  and  driven,  by  a  series  of 
wrongs,  into  revolution  and  independence.  Mankind,  in  our  theory, 
do  not  hold  their  rights  from  kings  or  royal  charters,  or  holy  alliances, 
but  from  God ;  and  far  from  its  being  proper  to  sympathize  with,  and 
defend,  oppressive  governments  in  re-conquering  revolted  subjects,  it  is 
false  to  our  own  course  in  the  Revolution  to  dream  of  it ;  and  the 
hearts  of  the  whole  American  people  should  burn  at  tyranny, — should 
sympathize  with  the  suffering,  invigorate  public  opinion  in  their  favor ; 
and,  as  soon  as  duty  may  permit,  after  their  independence  has  become 
in  fact  established,  through  a  new  government  instituted,  and  new 
laws  and  rulers  selected,  and  stability  and  quiet  given  to  their  national 
affairs,  we  ought  to  acknowledge  both  their  de  facto  and  dejure  exist- 
ence,— their  full  right  to  come  into  the  family  of  nations,  and  exer- 
cise all  the  powers  of  independent  sovereignties.  The  other  side  of 
this  question  is  the  British  or  European  side.  Theirs  is  the  doctrine 
of  eternal  allegiance ;  ours,  that  of  free  agency  and  self-government. 
Theirs  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Divine  right  of  kings ;  ours,  that  of  the 
Divine  right  of  the  people.  Theirs  is  the  doctrine  of  tyranny  over  the 
mind  and  conscience, — the  reign  of  it  upheld  by  the  bowstring,  the 
inquisition,  and  standing  armies;  ours  is  the  doctrine  of  liberty, 
upheld  by  reason,  intelligence,  and  sound  morals.  In  some  respects, 
the  struggle  between  these  principles  has  been  going  on  since  civiliza- 
tion has  been  much  diffused,  and  especially  between  colonies  and  their 
parent  country, — the  former  striving  for  privileges  commensurate  with 
their  growth  and  rights.  It  is  the  child  become  a  man,  and  claiming 
the  authority  and  immunities  of  a  man ;  and  is  to  be  countenanced, 
rather  than  proscribed.  All  people  thus  situated,  in  all  time, — 
whether  Carthaginians  from  Tyre,  Greeks  from  Egypt,  Marsellois  and 
Syracusans  from  Greece,  Spaniards  from  Borne,  North  Americans 
from  England,  or  South  Americans  from  Spain, — all  have  thus  acted, 
and  been  thus  recognized  and  sustained ;  and  so  must  be  Texas.  But 
we  were  destined  to  open  the  drama  on  the  new  continent.  " 

The  colonial  system  thus  prostrated  here  in  1776,  and  a  new  gov- 
ernment like  our  own  springing  up  on  its  ruins,  astonished  the  powers 
of  Europe,  as  well  as  all  the  Old  World,  as  much  as  the  original  dis- 
covery of  America  by  the  great  world-jinder  who  breathes  in  marble 
by  Persico  in  front  of  the  capitol.     Yet,  forsooth,  we  hear  it  now 


372  RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS. 

gravely  argued  that  a  people  like  those  in  Texas  cannot,  dejure,  cede 
their  territory,  or  unite  with  us  in  government ;  but  must  first,  with 
due  humility,  ask  leave  of  Mexico,  or  submit  to  be  reconquered  by 
her  and  have  the  conveyance  emanate  from  her,  in  order  to  have  it 
suit  our  opponents'  modern  American  notions  of  self-government ;  and 
all  this,  though  Texas  revolted  for  as  good  cause  as  we  did  from 
England,  though  she  has  established  as  good  a  constitution  and  laws, 
and  though  she  has  maintained  them  all  firmly  and  unimpaired  for 
years,  and  has  been  recognized  and  negotiated  with  as  a  sovereign  and 
independent  nation  by  all  the  great  powers  of  Christendom !  Yes, 
kings,  at  the  Congress  of  Vienna,  may  cede  principalities  and  powers, 
extinguish  old  or  create  new  governments,  and  transfer  the  people  like 
sheep ;  or  kings  alone  may  partition  Polands,  and  blot  out  obnoxious 
dynasties  and  empires  from  the  map  of  the  world, — as  England  does, 
over  and  over  again,  in  India; — but  a  sovereign  people  and  their  estab- 
lished government,  by  a  vote  almost  unanimous,  are  to  be  held  incompe- 
tent to  cede  their  territory  and  change  their  government.  And  this 
is  to  be  held,  also,  by  us  Anglo-Americans  and  Spanish-Mexicans,  who 
exist  as  nations  only  by  revolts  and  changes  of  their  own  governments ; 
and,  furthermore,  that,  if  we  dare  only  by  peaceful  negotiation  to  take 
the  cession,  it  ought  to  call  down  on  our  presumptuous  heads  all  the 
horrors  of  foreign  war. 

What  are  the  more  specific  points  in  this  objection  interposed  by 
senators  in  debate  ? 

First,  that,  though  independent  and  sovereign,  the  republic  of  Texas 
is  not  competent  to  cede  its  whole  territory,  though  it  might  be  to 
cede  a  part.  And  it  is  urged  that,  in  the  case  of  Louisiana  and 
Florida,  only  a  part  of  Spain  and  France  was  ceded. 

But  how  absurd  does  such  an  objection  appear,  when,  if  Texas  owns 
200,000,000  of  acres,  she  might  legally  cede  199,999,999  acres,  but 
not  that  and  the  other  acre ;  or  she  might  legally  cede  a  quarter  of  it 
at  one  time,  another  quarter  at  another,  and  so  through  the  whole, 
except  the  last !  No,  sir !  she  is  neither  entirely  independent  nor 
entirely  sovereign,  if  incapable  of  conveying  the  whole.  Such  are  the 
principles  of  national  law. 

"  A  free  people,  or  a  king,  may  alienate  their  territory,  in  part  or  in  full.'' —  Gro- 
tius,  2  b.,  ch.  6,  sec.  7. 

And  if  in  full,  then  the  union  of  their  people  with  our  form  of  gov- 
ernment follows  as  a  matter  of  course,  unless  they  choose  to  emigrate 
elsewhere,  and  join  some  other  government,  or  form  a  new  one  on  some 
vacant  portion  of  the  earth,  like  that  of  JEneas  and  his  companions 
from  Troy,  or  Dido  from  Tyre.  And  if  the  people  and  the  independ- 
ent republic  of  Texas  are,  for  this  reason,  not  as  competent  to  unite 
with  us  entirely  as  they  are  to  cede  only  a  part  of  their  territory,  then 
the  absurdity  would  seem  to  follow,  that  they  never  can  be  competent 
for  admission  into  the  Union,  though  recognized  by  Mexico,  and  no 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  373 

shadow  of  war  existing,  till  they  become  qualified  by  abandoning  their 
independence,  repudiating  republicanism,  and,  as  a  servile  dependency 
or  re-conquest  of  the  monarchs  of  Spain  or  Mexico,  be  sold  merely  as  a 
portion  of  their  territory  to  the  United  States. 

When  senators  contend  that  this  cession  of  the  whole  destroys  the 
ceding  government  or  nation,  and  is  hence  impracticable  and  unprece- 
dented, they  forget  that  the  nation  may  still  hold  together  and  migrate, 
or  may  agree  to  unite  with  the  neighbor  to  whom  their  territory 
has  been  conveyed ;  and  that  this  is  neither  unusual  nor  unreasonable. 
Pray  tell  me,  did  not  Rhode  Island  unite  with  us  all  her  territory, 
and  all  her  people,  and  all  her  government,  rather  than  a  part ;  and 
thus  became  annexed  to  that  Union  whose  constitution  she  before  had 
refused  to  aid  in  forming,  and  refused  to  adopt,  till  in  all  quarters 
denounced  and  reproached  by  your  fathers,  and  till  legislative  penalties 
and  burdens  were  threatened  to  her  by  the  administration  of  Washing- 
ton himself?  But,  notwithstanding  this,  does  the  senator  (Mr.  Sim- 
mons) admit,  as  he  argues  about  Texas,  that  Rhode  Island  was 
incompetent  to  unite  with  us  1  that  she  came  in  only  under  the  threats 
of  Congress,  and  hence  it  was  void?  or  that  her  ulone  star"  (all  the 
other  old  States  being  then  under  a  new  constitution  without  her) 
became,  by  a  junction  with  them,  blotted  out,  extinguished,  and  her 
sovereignty  destroyed  ?  Just  as  much  in  her  case  as  in  that  of  Texas ; 
and,  as  I  have  shown  before,  and  will  ere  long  again,  just  as  much,  and 
no  more,  as  new  provinces  and  their  whole  governments  were  destroyed 
by  uniting  with  Holland,  and  others  with  Switzerland,  and  others  with 
Central  America,  and  others  with  us. 

It  is  true  that,  if  the  republic  thus  ceding  and  uniting  is  under 
obligations  to  others,  she  cannot  thus  become  rid  of  them ;  but  they 
remain  on  her,  or  the  whole  government  to  which  she  is  joined.  Such 
are  her  obligations  by  treaties,  and  her  liabilities  or  exposures  for 
wrongs,  or  for  claims,  however  unjust,  by  other  powers.  But  that 
does  not  impair  the  full  right  to  make  a  cession,  though  it  may  affect 
the  expediency  and  duty  of  us  to  take  it,  if  the  liabilities  are  very 
onerous,  or  her  belligerent  dangers  very  imminent. 

We  will  look  into  that  soon,  after  disposing  of  the  question  of  the 
right  to  cede  the  whole.  The  only  other  point  in  the  objections  I  have 
heard  urged  against  that  right  is  the  claim  still  set  up  by  Mexico  to 
rule  over  Texas.  But,  however  that  claim  may  be  obstinately  per- 
sisted in,  I  contend  that,  after  all  which  has  taken  place,  and  now 
exists,  it  does  not  impair  the  right  of  other  nations  to  take  such  cession, 
or  of  Texas  to  make  it.     Please  to  note  the  distinction. 

The  incident  that  a  war  may  be  waged  by  any  belligerent  against 
any  purchaser  of  territory  from  the  other  belligerent,  does  not  impair 
the  right  to  sell ;  for  the  vendor  may  have  owned  the  territory  for 
centuries,  and  been  recognized  by  its  antagonist,  as  well  as  the  rest  of 
the  world.  But  it  does  influence  the  expediency  of  buying,  and  more 
especially  if  the  belligerent  conveys  all  his  territory,  and  unites  his 
32 


374  KE-ANKEXATION  OF  TEXAS. 

government  with  another ;  because,  in  that  event,  I  admit  that  the  risk 
of  such  claims,  and  such  hostilities  as  exist, —  all  the  incumbrances, — » 
are  assumed.  Yet  this  is  the  whole,  and  is  no  impeachment  of  the 
independent  and  sovereign  right  to  convey ;  —  that  right  Texas  has,  if 
she  possesses  the  usual  attributes  of  a  nation. 

She  is  one  (as  before  explained  in  a  recent  letter  of  mine  on  this 
subject)  in  such  manner  and  form,  no  less  than  substance,  as,  in  my 
apprehension,  justifies  other  nations  in  treating  her  as  a  de  jure  as 
well  as  a  de  facto  government,  and  competent,  under  the  principles  of 
popular  liberty,  and  the  soundest  international  law  in  both  hemispheres, 
to  cede  her  territory  or  unite  her  government  to  another,  without 
asking  the  consent,  or  giving  just  cause  of  war  to  any  power. 

What  are  the  common-sense  tests  on  this  subject  1  If  size  of  terri- 
tory, she  is  as  big  as  France,  and  as  large  as  any  four  of  our  own 
States.  If  population,  she  has  one  ranging,  by  different  estimates,  from 
two  to  three  hundred  thousand  people  of  all  kinds.  If  a  regular  con- 
stitution of  government  and  code  of  laws,  she  has  both.  If  a  uniform 
administration  of  justice,  and  the  rights  of  conscience  secured  to  all, 
rather  than  the  protection  of  the  Catholic  religion  alone,  as  in  Mexico, 
she  enjoys  them.  She  has  troops  and  ships  of  war.  She  has  had  her 
independence  acknowledged  by  the  United  States,  by  Great  Britain, 
France,  Holland,  Belgium,  and,  indeed,  all  the  great  powers  of  Chris- 
tendom not  under  the  sway  of  the  Holy  Alliance ;  and  she  has  treaties 
of  commerce  and  international  agents  with  most  of  them. 

No  towns,  castles,  or  counties,  have  there  been  held  by  her  old 
enemy  in  doubtful  or  divided  empire.  Her  revolution  is  not  in  embryo, 
but  full  grown ;  not  going  on  by  preparatory  steps,  but  finished,  stable. 
Not  distracted  by  rival  constitutions,  rival  chieftains,  and  rival  armies, 
such  as  long  desolated  many  Spanish  provinces,  but  domestic  harmony 
and  peace  reign  throughout.  Their  prisons  are  not  filled  with  political 
victims.  Order,  and  law,  and  the  rights  of  property,  are  respected ; 
and  neither  taste,  nor  education,  nor  sympathies  of  any  kind,  are 
lingering  round  their  former  government,  and  smoothing  the  way  to 
the  remotest  thought  at  reconciliation.  But  Texas  has  other  qualities 
and  characteristics  as  a  nation,  showing  her  competent  to  enter  into 
any  contract  or  arrangement  with  other  nations,  as  fully  as  the  oldest 
power  of  Europe.  Besides  having  been  for  several  years  admitted,  in 
all  respects,  into  the  great  family  of  nations,  she  is  liable  for  her  own 
wrongs  to  them ;  and  is  held  so,  and  not  Mexico,  as  appears  by  her 
treaty  of  indemnity  to  us  in  1838.  She  is  authorized  to  seek  redress 
for  injuries  to  herself,  and  not  Mexico  for  her ;  and  she  has,  in  this 
way,  and  by  treaties  binding  her  commerce,  limits,  soil,  and  jurisdic- 
tion, been  much  wider  acknowledged,  and  longer  in  the  independent 
government  of  herself,  than  had  Bonaparte,  in  France,  when  he  sold 
Louisiana  to  us.  Such,  I  admit,  was  not  the  position  of  her  affairs 
when  annexation  was  proposed  and  declined  in  1837 ;  but  their  affairs 
have  made  great  strides  since ;  and  one  unfortunate  mistake  with  some, 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS.  375 

in  the  consideration  of  this  topic,  appears  to  be  in  not  reflecting  enough 
on  the  changes  in  her  relations  and  national  maturity  and  stability, 
made  by  the  progress  of  time  and  events  during  the  past  seven  years. 
It  is  manifest  that,  if  a  people  have,  by  sound  principles,  a  right  to 
self-government,  and,  when  oppressed,  can,  like  the  United  States, 
properly  revolt  from  England,  or  Mexico  from  Spain,  or  Texas  from 
Mexico,  and  having  declared  their  independence,  do  maintain  it  till 
they  give,  as  in  this  case,  all  the  usual  indications  among  nations  of 
manhood, — discretion,  power,  justice,  and  order, — the  question  of  their 
de  jure  sovereignty  thus  becomes  as  clearly  settled  in  respect  to  all 
third  persons  as  their  de  facto  sovereignty.  The  assent  or  acknowl- 
edgment of  their  old  masters  does  not  constitute  the  right,  but  merely 
admits  it ;  as  the  minors  or  apprentices,  claiming  to  be  adults  and  free, 
and  acting  as  such,  derive  their  rights  from  the  facts  of  the  case, 
whether  acknowledged  or  not  by  those  to  whom  they  were  once  in 
subjection.  The  world  must  otherwise  become  divided  into  mere  holy 
alliances,  with  all  their  monopolizing  dogmas,  on  the  one  hand,  and  on 
the  other  only  such  as  they  consider  mere  rebels,  pirates,  and  banditti ; 
breaking  up,  in  this  way,  all  reform  or  progress,  and  yielding  to  the 
claim  of  the  Divine  right  of  kings  over  all  the  human  race,  till  volun- 
tarily relinquished.  The  war  of  opinion  on  this  question  was  settled 
in  favor  of  the  people,  after  sixty  years  of  desolation  and  carnage,  on 
the  plains  of  Holland ;  again  at  Lexington,  Saratoga,  Yorktown ;  again 
in  Europe,  after  deluging  France  in  blood ;  again  and  again  on  both 
slopes  of  the  Andes,  as  well  as  in  Mexico  herself,  on  a  basis  never 
again  to  be  shaken  in  the  New  World. 

Moreover,  she  has  a  body  of  intelligent  and  talented  men,  of  the  true 
Saxon  race.  And  if  all  these  do  not  constitute  a  State,  what  does  1 
Not  kings,  garters,  and  titles  of  nobility, —  not  high- walled  battlements, 
nor  moated  gates, —  but  "men,  high-minded  men,  who  know  their 
rights,  and,  knowing,  dare  maintain." 

The  last  objection  under  this  head  is,  that,  though  she  may  be  a  de 
facto  State,  she  is  not  one  de  jure  ;  and  therefore  possesses  no  com- 
petency to  make  the  cession. 

What  is  a  de  facto  government,  as  contradistinguished  from  a  de  jure 
one  ?  It  seems  to  be  argued  that  one  merely  possesses  power,  regard- 
less of  right,  or  without  reference  to  right.  The  other  not  only 
possesses  it,  but  rightfully,  under  good  authority,  reasons,  or  laws; 
for  jure  means  only  one  or  the  other,  as  occasion  requires.  Thus, 
Cromwell's  government  has  been  called  a  de  facto  one.  But,  without 
reference  to  his  ultimate  rights  in  respect  to  the  Stuarts,  many  other 
nations  made  treaties  with  him,  as  rightful  head  of  England,  in  less 
than  one  year  after  he  became  protector.  Such  as  that  with  Denmark, 
September  15th,  1654,  when  he  had  been  protector  only  from  Decem- 
ber 16,  1653,  and  in  1654  with  Sweden,  Portugal,  and  France.  (3d 
Col.  of  Treaties,  67.) 

The  possession  of  power,  I  grant,  must  not  be  merely  momentary, 


376  RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

and  unsettled  or  changing,  but  apparently  firm.  (Martin's  Laws  of 
Nations,  b.  7,  chap.  1.)  And  he  was  well  known  to  multiply  his 
treaties,  in  order  to  strengthen  his  claim  of  right. 

In  this  way  he  soon  became  so  fully  seated  in  power,  and  the  nation 
so  acquiescent,  and  the  Stuarts  so  incapable  of  disturbing  him,  that 
his  treaties  of  alliance  and  cessions,  as  well  as  other  treaties, —  like 
those  of  Bonaparte  to  us  of  Louisiana,  in  less  than  two  years  from 
his  acknowledgment  by  other  powers, —  must  be  regarded  as  right  and 
valid.  What  Stuart  or  Guelph  since  have  dared  to  violate  any  of 
Cromwell's  treaties,  as  not  made  by  a  de  jure  government,  so  far  as 
respects  all  foreign  powers  ?  What  Bourbon  has,  since  1803,  ventured 
to  attempt  to  vacate  Napoleon's  treaties  of  cession  with  us,  as  well  as 
other  powers,  for  not  being  made  by  a  de  jure  government,  looking  to 
the  rest  of  the  world? 

But  there  is  much  more  in  the  present  case  as  to  the  de  jure  gov- 
ernment of  Texas,  if  we  regard  its  origin  and  our  own  system  of  pol- 
itics. Texas  has  been,  as  we  before  intimated,  an  independent  and 
sovereign  state,  with  an  excellent  separate  constitution,  near  twenty 
years.  Her  union,  during  a  part  of  this  period,  with  the  Mexican 
confederacy,  does  not  alter  this.  She  has  since  broken  no  obligations 
as  to  that  confederacy,  but  they  have  all  been  broken  by  her  oppress- 
ors ;  and  these  last  are  the  real  rebels  and  overthrowers  of  the  con- 
federacy, and  not  she.  Texas  had  reason,  authority,  and  law,  all  to 
resist  the  assaults  of  Mexico  for  enslaving  her  to  a  new  and  consolidated 
system.  She  had  never  entered  into  any  such  system.  Her  efforts 
to  maintain  her  independence,  under  those  assaults,  have  been  as  right- 
ful as  ours  in  1776.  She  has,  since  1836,  been  independent  even  of 
the  confederacy,  and  been  a  de  jure,  as  well  as  de  facto,  sovereign 
government;  and  though,  in  1837,  the  union  with  her  might  have 
been  more  likely  to  expose  us  to  war,  and  hence  not  prudent,  it  would, 
in  the  other  view,  as  de  jure,  have  been  perfectly  justifiable,  if  her 
government  then  had  appeared  to  be  settled,  mature,  and  efficient. 

It  is  most  extraordinary  that  the  right  of  Texas  to  cede  to  us  her 
territory  without  the  consent  of  Mexico  should  now  be  doubted  by  those 
who,  in  1825  and  1829,  did  not  question  the  right  of  Mexico,  dejure 
as  well  as  de  facto,  to  cede  Texas  without  the  consent  of  Spain. 

How  stood  the  facts  then  as  to  details  ?  Mexico,  though  revolution- 
ary, and  with  internal  disturbances,  under  Spanish  supremacy,  between 
the  Creoles  and  others,  from  1810  to  1821,  yet  never  sought  nor 
asked  independence  of  Spain ;  and  both  parties  vied  in  loyalty  to  her, 
till  Iturbide's  defection,  and  the  declaration  of  independence,  made  at 
Iguala,  24th  February,  1821.  (4  State  Papers,  848,  835,  and  1 
Foote's  History,  94,  96,  99.)  The  troops  and  power  of  Spain  were 
driven  from  the  capital  and  most  of  the  cities  during  that  year ;  but 
the  castle  of  Ulloa,  at  Vera  Cruz,  continued  in  the  possession  of  the 
mother  country,  when  we  recognized  her  independence  in  1822,  and 
when  we  first  applied  to  re-purchase  Texas  in  1825,  as  extending  to 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS.  377 

the  Rio  del  Norte.  The  constitution  of  Mexico  admits  that  her  inde- 
pendence never  commenced  till  1821,  being  "  given  in  Mexico,  \th 
October ■,  1824,  fourth  year  of  independence :"  (2  Kennedy,  443.) 
Yet,  in  only  one  year  after  the  adoption  of  this  constitution,  only  four 
after  her  independence  was  declared,  and  but  three  after  it  was  recog- 
nized by  us, —  all  short  of  what  prevails  in  Texas  now, —  Messrs. 
Adams  and  Clay  thought  she  had  the  de  jure  right  to  cede  territory 
to  us,  without  asking  the  consent  of  Spain,  and  without  heeding  the 
adoption  of  any  war  then  existing. 

How  could  that  be  legitimate,  if  Texas,  after  being  an  independent 
State  near  twenty  years,  and  separated  from  Mexico  eight  years,  can- 
not now  be  allowed  as  de  jure  competent  to  negotiate  for  selling  her 
territory,  without  the  consent  of  Mexico?  Like  facts  apply  to  1829  ; 
and  they  are  appealed  to  now,  not  for  taunt  or  recrimination,  but  as 
evidence  that  the  ablest  minds  then,  and  the  most  experienced  diplo- 
matists, had  entire  confidence  that  such  a  cession  as  is  now  before  us 
could  be  accepted  with  propriety,  and  vindicated  before  the  morality, 
religion,  and  law,  of  the  whole  civilized  world. 

The  only  other  differences  material  to  the  argument  are,  that  in 
1825  Mexico  had  been  recognized  by  not  half  so  many  other  nations 
as  Texas  has  now,  and  had  maintained  her  independence  for 
only  about  half  as  long  a  period ;  and  that  the  revolution  in  Mexico 
was  then  progressing,  not  in  all  respects  finished ;  her  independence 
unsettled,  not  firm ;  her  soil  invaded  and  occupied  by  her  enemy,  not 
free  from  hostile  feet;  her  laws  despotic,  not  liberal;  her  people 
agitated  by  internal  broils  and  factions,  not  united  or  peaceful ;  and 
Santa  Anna's  government  much  like  what  Bolivar  considered  his  in 
Peru — not  settled,  but  a  camp ;  "  for,"  said  he,  "  my  administration 
can  only  be  called  a  campaign"  A  fortiori,  then,  can  Texas 
cede  now  de  jure,  if  Mexico  could  then.  But  another  difference,  still 
more  potential  in  its  influence  rather  than  argumentative  in  force,  is, 
I  admit,  that  nobody  then  stood  behind  Spain  to  back  her  up  ;  while 
now  we  see,  or  seem  to  see,  the  shadows  of  England's  thousand  ships 
of  war  in  the  wake  of  Mexico,  and  hostile  to  our  success  from  other 
causes  too  deeply  well  known  to  need  recapitulation. 

What  do  gentlemen  on  the  other  side,  as  lawyers  and  publicists, 
hold  as  the  true  doctrine  on  this  subject  of  de  facto  and  de  jure  gov- 
ernments ?  Let  us  be  plain  and  explicit  with  each  other.  Was  not 
Cromwell's  protectorate,  after  established  and  recognized  by  other 
powers,  a  de  jure  as  well  as  de  facto  government  in  respect  to 
them?  And  could  he  not  legally  have  ceded  territory,  as  well  as 
received  cessions,  until  the  Stuarts  and  their  partisans  renounced 
their  claims  ?  Did  foreign  powers  treat  with  him,  or  with  the  exiled 
family  1  So  with  Napoleon  :  was  he  not  de  jure  as  well  as  de  facto 
emperor,  as  to  the  rest  of  the  world,  until  the  Bourbons  and  their 
partisans  should  recognize  him  ?  Was  he  acknowledged  and  treated 
with,  or  Louis  XVIII.  in  banishment?  Neither  he  nor  Cromwell 
32* 


378  KE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

was  ever  able  to  transfer  territory  and  impose  obligations  on  either 
England  or  France,  by  the  doctrines  on  the  other  side,  though 
all  history  and  national  law  have  settled  the  fact  the  other  way. 
Some  doubted  the  de  jure  right  of  Don  Miguel  when  in  power  de 
facto,  and  others  that  of  Joseph  Bonaparte  in  Spain,  and  even  of 
Louis  Philippe  now  in  France ;  but  were  they,  and  are  they,  not  all 
regarded  as  de  jure  to  make  and  receive  cessions  while  in  power,  and 
acknowledged  by  other  nations,  however  soon  most  of  them,  as  well  as 
Cromwell  and  Bonaparte,  became  dethroned? 

But  the  senator  from  Massachusetts  says  there  are  three  stages  in 
reaching  de  jure  power.  First,  a  revolution ;  second,  a  recognition 
by  others ;  and,  thirdly,  an  acknowledgment  by  the  old  authorities,  or 
an  utter  abandonment  by  them  of  their  claims.  But  neither  such 
acknowledgment  nor  such  abandonment  took  place  by  the  Stuarts  as 
to  Cromwell,  or  the  Bourbons  as  to  Bonaparte ;  and  yet  their  acts 
have  de  jure  bound  both  England  and  France  as  to  all  other  nations. 

It  is  just  so  as  to  a  revolution  like  Holland,  Mexico  or  the  United 
States,  or,  in  one  view,  Texas ;  separating  a  portion  from  the  old  gov- 
ernment, and  forming  of  it  a  new  one,  and  declaring  its  independence. 
Does  nothing  but  the  acknowledgment  of  the  parent  power,  or  an  utter 
abandonment  of  its  claims,  enable  the  separated  and  independent  por- 
tion to  perform  dejure  acts  as  a  nation,  and  bind  its  people  and  acquire 
rights  for  them  of  the  rest  of  the  world,  as  if  a  de  jure  government  ? 
Certainly.  Certainly  Holland,  Mexico,  and  the  United  States,  all,  as 
well  as  Texas,  have  claimed  to  be  de  jure  long  before  such  acknowl- 
edgment or  abandonment.  Holland  dated  her  independence  seventy 
years  before  Spain  recognized  it. 

Our  independence  dates  from  1776,  and  not  its  recognition  by 
England  in  1783.  So  that  of  Mexico  from  1821,  and  not  1836,  its 
recognition  by  Spain.  So  Belgium,  from  1830,  and  not  afterwards, 
when  recognized  by  Holland.  And  so  does  Texas  from  1836,  and  not 
any  future  period,  when  Mexico  may  admit  it. 

All  of  them  have  acted  on  such  a  claim  before  a  recognition  by  the 
parent  government  as  right ;  and  our  assumed  power  to  resist  oppres- 
sion, and  establish  new  forms  of  government,  without  the  consent  of 
our  oppressors,  is  mere  vapor,  and  the  American  system  baseless,  if 
that  assent,  express  or  implied,  is  necessary  to  make  our  acts  as  to  the 
rest  of  mankind  de  jure.  Popular  governments  are  never  inclined  to 
such  nice  distinctions,  especially  when  these  are  unfriendly  to  popular 
rights.  But  I  admit  that  the  recognition  of  a  new  government,  or  the 
second  stage  in  the  gentleman's  growth  to  a  dejure  condition,  does  not 
require  other  nations  to  go  further  unless  they  please,  and  depart  from 
a  neutral  position,  or  by  any  act  not  required  by  public  duty  become 
exposed  to  actual  war ;  and  that  it  has  been  customary  with  other 
nations,  including  ourselves,  not  to  go  any  further.  (4  State  Papers, 
846,  848.)  But  this  grows  out  of  the  absence  of  any  motive  usually 
to  go  further,  and  out  of  the  pendency  of  a  belligerent  State  between 


RE-ANNEXATION  OF  TEXAS.  379 

the  old  and  new  nation,  in  which  we  might  become  uselessly  involved ; 
and  not  from  the  fact  that  the  new  nation  is  not  dejure,  as  well  as  de 
facto,  a  sovereign  power  as  to  all  other  nations,  and,  as  such,  compe- 
tent de  jure  to  do  all  which  other  belligerents  may.  Herein  lies  the 
error  or  fallacy  of  the  reasoning  on  the  other  side.  Martin's  Law  of 
Nations,  p.  77,  substantially  confirms  these  views,  by  holding  that  if 
a  government  is  established  de  facto,  foreign  powers  have  no  right  to 
say  it  is  not  one  de  jure. 

A  recognition  of  independence  of  another  power,  standing  alone, 
obliges  our  courts  to  treat  them  so,  and  to  give  them  and  their  citizens 
all  rights  of  property,  and  jurisdiction,  and  sovereignty,  as  in  any  other 
case.  It  is  dejure,  as  well  as  de  facto,  in  the  most  critical  and  solemn 
forum  of  another  nation.    (1  Kent,  25.) 

Yet  some  senators,  after  all,  seem  to  think  it  but  "  an  armed 
insurrectioyt,"  or,  as  Russia  denominated  the  independence  of  Mexico 
and  South  America,  but  "  criminal  combinations"  of  seditious  sub- 
jects against  their  legitimate  kings.  But  it  is  neither  the  American 
side  of  the  question,  nor  that  espoused  by  Mr.  Webster  himself. 

"  Mexico,"  says  he,  "  may  have  chosen  to  consider,  and  may  still  choose  to  con- 
sider, Texas  as  having  been,  at  all  times,  since  1835,  and  as  still  continuing,  a  rebel- 
lious province  ;  but  the  world  has  been  obliged  to  take  a  very  different  view  of  the 
matter. 

"  And,  it  must  be  added,  that  the  constitution,  public  treaties,  and  the  laws,  oblige 
the  President  to  regard  Texas  as  an  independent  State,  and  its  territory  as  no  part  of 
the  territory  of  Mexico."    (See  Letter  of  July,  1842.) 

Nor  is  this  merely  theoretical.  On  two  occasions,  we  have  prac- 
tically recognized  the  power  of  the  de  facto  governments  on  the  west 
of  us  to  be  de  jure,  so  as  to  make  permanent  compacts  with  us  con- 
cerning the  boundaries  of  their  territory,  long  before  they  were 
acknowledged  as  sovereign  by  the  parent  country. 

Thus,  January  12,  1828,  we  completed  with  Mexico  a  treaty 
regulating  the  limit  of  the  territory  contiguous  to  us,  without  asking 
the  consent  of  Spain,  though  she  then  made  urgent  claim  to  Mexico, 
though  the  latter  had  been  independent  but  seven  years,  and  though 
her  separate  sovereignty  had  not  then  been  acknowledged  by  Spain, 
and  was  not  till  1836. 

So,  again,  in  1838,  April  25,  we  made  a  similar  treaty  of  limits 
with  Texas,  as  to  her  territory,  without  consulting  Mexico,  and  when 
her  de  jure  rights  were  as  much  in  question  as  now.  Some  have 
asked,  if  the  right  to  cede  was  clear  in  1837,  as  well  as  now,  why  the 
proposal  then  was  not  accepted  ?  Simply,  because  the  danger  of  war 
was  then  greater,  and  the  hope  of  permanent  independence  was  less. 

The  character  and  prospects  of  the  war  with  Mexico  in  1837  were 
very  different  from  the  condition  of  things  now ;  and  our  exposure 
much  greater  then  to  be  involved  in  difficulty  of  taking  a  cession  so 
soon  after  one  great  invasion,  and  amidst  the  prospect  of  another,  and 


380  RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS. 

■without  any  long  abandonment,  as  now,  of  a  regular  war  on  Texas  for 
many  years. 

The  government  of  Texas  was  then,  also,  less  settled,  less  firm,  less 
likely  to  be  permanent,  less  ripened,  less  recognized  by  all  Christen- 
dom ;  and  her  claims  less  on  the  sympathies  and  interference  of  other 
friendly  powers,  by  alliances  or  cessions,  to  put  an  end  to  barbarous 
maraudings,  as  well  as  oppression ;  and  the  authority  of  Mexico  was 
less  to  enforce  any  pretensions  over  a  territory  so  much  longer  inde- 
pendent, acknowledged  by  others,  matured  in  her  institutions,  and,  by 
the  lapse  of  time,  emancipated  from  her  vain  efforts  at  control.  The 
statute  of  limitations  bars  most  debts  and  claims  in  five  or  six  years ; 
and  much  more  than  that  has  elapsed  here. 

The  whole  real  difficulty  resolves  itself  into  one,  not  of  a  right  now 
to  sell  or  cede  on  the  one  part,  and  we  to  buy  on  the  other,  but 
one  as  to  the  just  and  probable  consequences  of  the  transaction,  con- 
sidering the  relations  actually  existing  between  Mexico  and  Texas, 
whether  belligerent  or  not ;  and,  if  belligerent,  whether  justly  so  or 
not.  It  follows,  then,  that,  if  an  independent  sovereignty,  Texas  can 
cede  rightfully  her  whole  territory,  as  well  as  a  part,  and  unite  her 
government,  as  well  as  territory,  with  us,  if  she  pleases.  Such  acts 
are  done  constantly  in  Europe  and  here,  both  in  republican  confed- 
eracies and  monarchies,  as  before  shown ;  and  Vattel,  as  cited  by  the 
senator  from  Illinois  (Mr.  Breese),  recognizes  the  principle  fully. 

Having  discussed  the  right  to  receive  and  the  right  to  cede  Texas, 
the  next  question  is,  whether,  as  a  duty,  the  treaty  for  the  annexation 
ought  not  to  be  ratified.  Are  the  reasons  for  it  not  ample,  and  our 
duty  clear  ?  The  presumption  certainly  would  be  that,  unless  strong 
public  objections  exist,  no  nation  would  decline  the  offer  of  a  large 
addition  to  its  territory,  population,  and  power.  More  especially  does 
such  a  presumption  arise,  when  the  territory  is  contiguous  and  con- 
venient, if  not  necessary;  has  been  long  sought  for,  under  three  or  four 
different  administrations ;  is  governed  by  institutions  and  laws  similar  to 
our  own,  and  inhabited  by  a  people  most  of  whom  have  a  like  origin, 
education  and  religion,  with  ourselves ;  and  concentrate  their  affections 
and  wishes  on  a  reunion  with  the  great  national  family  from  which 
they  sprang. 

I  am  not  one  of  those  disposed  to  exaggerate  the  advantages  of  such 
a  union  to  us ;  nor  would  I,  on  the  contrary,  scoff  at  the  objections 
which  are  entertained  —  and  honestly,  without  doubt  —  by  many 
against  it.  But,  in  weighing  the  latter,  I  trust  that  we  may  be  able 
to  free  ourselves  from  some  prejudices  and  apprehensions,  suited  to 
other  forms  of  government,  rather  than  a  representative  confederacy ; 
and  be  a  little  less  local  in  policy  and  timid  in  action  than  if  we  were, 
as  once,  but  three  millions  of  people,  and  had  confined  our  explorations 
to  Lake  Champlain  and  Cape  Cod,  rather  than  stretching  west  on  our 
own  soil  to  the  Rocky  Mountains  and  the  Pacific  Ocean. 

Not  forgetting  the  enlarged  duties,  as  well  as  interests,  that  have 


HE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  381 

devolved  on  us  by  our  new  position,  let  us  examine,  dispassionately, 
both  the  reasons  for  and  the  objections  against  the  annexation  pro- 
posed, as  a  moral  and  political  duty.  For,  though  the  right  to  take 
and  to  make  the  cession  may  on  both  sides  be  clear,  our  duty  may  not 
require  an  assent  to  the  ratification ;  and  I  am  frank  to  say,  that  if  I 
regarded  the  treaty  as  a  mere  pecuniary  speculation,  like  the  calcula- 
tions of  the  senator  from  Rhode  Island  (Mr.  Simmons),  my  hopes 
would  not  be  great  for  profit  or  credit ;  or,  if  I  looked  at  some  of  the 
reasons  assigned  for  the  measure  in  the  correspondence,  or  the 
prudence  of  some  of  the  agents  employed,  or  the  patriotism  of  some 
taking  deep  interest  in  the  question.  But  these,  and  many  formal 
exceptions,  seem  scarcely  suitable  to  the  magnitude  of  the  subject,  and 
the  high  duties  and  national  honor  and  interests  which  are  at  issue. 
One  of  the  most  prominent  of  these  interests  is  the  importance  of 
Texas  to  the  United  States  for  security  to  the  commerce  of  the  west 
and  south-west,  through  the  mouth  of  the  Mississippi  river.  The 
freedom  of  that  commerce  was  a  topic  which,  as  long  ago  as  under  the 
old  Confederation,  agitated  the  whole  country.  It  then  introduced  the 
first  geographical  division  of  parties  between  the  south  and  the  north ; 
in  which  the  latter,  unfortunately,  was  quite  as  strenuous  in  resisting 
efforts  and  sacrifices  to  obtain  that  freedom,  as  it  is  now  in  resisting 
those  to  secure  it,  after  having  been  obtained. 

A  few  circumstances  in  the  agitation  of  that  age  indicate  strongly 
prejudices  and  contests  not  very  unlike  the  present  one. 

Sir.  Gorham,  of  Massachusetts,  "avowed  his  opinion  that  the  shut- 
ting the  Mississippi  would  be  advantageous  to  the  Atlantic  States,  and 
wished  to  see  it  shut."    (Madison  Papers,  p.  609.) 

But  Virginia  extended  over  Kentucky,  and  claimed  all  the  north- 
west ;  while  North  Carolina  also  crossed  the  Alleghanies  into  Ten- 
nessee. Hence  the  south,  at  that  early  day,  became  the  champions 
of  western  interests,  no  less  than  southern  ones. 

And  though  Mr.  Aymer,  apparently  concurring  with  Mr.  Gorham, 
"thought  the  encouragement  of  the  western  country  was  suicide  on 
the  part  of  the  old  States"  (3  Madison  Papers,  p.  1446),  and  though 
the  vote  of  seven  States  was  at  first  procured  to  proceed  in  the  nego- 
tiations with  Spain,  without  insisting  on  the  free  navigation  of  the 
Mississippi,  yet  Mr.  Jefferson  wrote  that  the  navigation  of  the  Missis- 
sippi we  must  have.  (1  Jefferson's  Life,  p.  433.)  And  Mr.  Jay  at 
last  admitted  our  right  to  it  was  good.  (4  Secret  Journal,  p.  451.) 
And  the  old  Congress,  before  breaking  up,  in  September,  1788, 
solemnly 

"Resolved,  That  the  free  navigation  of  the  river  Mississippi  is  a  clear  and  essential 
right  of  the  United  States,  and  that  the  same  ought  to  be  considered  and  supported 
as  such."  (4  Secret  Journal,  453,  September  16,  1778.) 

In  the  convention,  while  forming  the  constitution,  Governeur  Morris 
frankly  stated  that "  the  fisheries,"  and  the  "Mississippi" —  security 


382  RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

to  them, —  "  were  the  two  great  objects  of  the  Union."    (3   Madison 
Papers,  1523.) 

The  whole  question,  as  a  national  one,  was  then  settled.  That  was 
the  embryo  of  the  present  crisis.  The  duty  to  secure  became  as 
imperative  as  had  been  the  duty  to  obtain.  A  million  and  a  half  of 
square  miles  of  territory,  and  what  are  now  nine  millions  of  people,  on 
the  waters  of  the  Mississippi  and  her  tributaries,  were  foreseen,  and 
were  to  be  shielded  in  peace  as  in  war ;  and  tranquillity  to  their  insti- 
tutions, no  less  than  safety  to  their  property  of  every  kind,  were  in 
advance  solemnly  guaranteed,  and  were  never  to  be  neglected.  On 
this  implied  pledge  your  public  lands  have  been  sold  there  and  settled. 

It  is  not  necessary,  at  this  part  of  our  inquiry,  to  detail  all  the 
steps  since  taken,  under  the  constitution,  to  carry  out  faithfully  one  of 
those  great  objects  of  the  Union  connected  with  the  Mississippi.  Spain 
resisted  and  intrigued  against  all  this.  She  was  one  of  the  last  to 
accede  to  our  independence,  and  to  make  any  treaty  of  limits  on  the 
south  as  to  the  Florida  line,  from  fear  of  our  revolt  proving  an  exam- 
ple contagious  to  her  American  colonies.  It  is  said,  by  one  of  our 
most  learned  historians,  that  a  document  exists  in  which  she  was 
advised  by  her  prime  minister  then  to  allow  the  whole  of  them  to 
become  independent,  except  her  West  India  Islands ;  and  if  that  advice 
had  been  followed,  which  subsequent  events,  with  the  loss  of  millions 
of  life  and  treasure,  show  to  have  been  so  wise,  our  present  difficulties 
as  to  Texas  would  probably  never  have  arisen.  She  pursued  the 
opposite  policy,  and,  after  the  peace  of  1783,  sought  to  push  her 
claims  even  on  the  Mississippi,  as  high  up  as  the  Ohio  river,  and  as 
far  east  as  the  Alleghanies.  And,  after  driving  her  from  these  pre- 
tensions, and  then  from  Florida  and  Louisiana,  her  descendants  hold 
on  upon  Texas  with  a  death-gripe ;  and  long  after  their  ability  to  sub- 
due it,  or  its  value  to  them  can  make  it  an  object  in  itself  at  all  desir- 
able. Both  freedom  and  security  to  the  navigation  of  that  mighty 
river  were  once  placed  wholly  within  our  grasp,  by  the  purchase  of 
Louisiana. 

I  say  this  under  the  impression  that  the  western  boundary  of  Lou- 
isiana, on  the  Gulf  of  Mexico,  truly  extended  to  the  Rio  del  Norte,  as 
heretofore  shown.  Any  border  enemy  was  then  flung  off  to  a  safe  dis- 
tance from  the  great  outlet  of  near  half  the  exports  of  the  whole 
Union.  New  Orleans,  the  magnificent  depot  of  the  entire  valley  of 
the  Mississippi,  was  then  shielded  from  hostile  surprise.  Our  trade 
with  the  West  Indies  and  Europe,  left  more  open  and  unannoyed,  and 
the  vast  population  on  the  western  waters,  now  nine,  and,  ere  a  cen- 
tury more,  to  be  ninety  millions  of  people, —  treble  the  numbers  of 
either  France  or  England,  and  more  than  treble  their  size  in  ter- 
ritory, —  was  thus  to  be  better  protected,  not  only  in  their  commerce, 
but  in  their  lives  and  honor,  from  both  the  hostile  tread  and  hostile 
machinations  of  an  encroaching  enemy.  The  security  thus  gained 
from  the  Indian  scalping-knife  was  an  additional  motive,  and  every 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS.  383 

cradle  in  the  west  witnessed  a  sounder  sleep  when  the  tomahawk  could 
be  removed  further  off,  and  forts  and  greater  distances  were  interposed 
between  the  log-cabin  and  the  savage  torch. 

I  say  that  all  this  was  accomplished  with  the  boundary  then 
obtained,  and  was  in  some  degree  lost  without  it,  having,  as  we  had, 
a  foreign  foe  and  foreign  Indians  so  near  us  as  the  Sabine  and 
the  Red  rivers.  The  great  American  captain  of  our  age,  with  hun- 
dreds of  others,  have  staked  their  skill  and  reputation  on  this;  and 
hence  that  boundary,  if  once  owned  by  us,  should  never  have  been 
parted  with  in  1819 ;  or  should  be  regained  the  first  favorable  and 
just  opportunity,  as  has  been  since  constantly  attempted  again  and 
again,  and  as  is  now  amicably  within  our  power,  by  ratifying  the 
treaty  under  consideration.  We  have  already  seen  that  it  is  no  new 
idea  that  freedom  of  commerce  is  of  little  value  without  its  security. 

It  is  no  new  project  that  a  line  further  west  than  the  Sabine  is  vital 
to  its  security,  as  well  as  important  for  protection  in  war,  both  against 
civilized  and  savage  foes. 

It  is  no  new  vagary,  that  when  our  fathers,  in  1786,  finally  resolved 
on  their  right  to  the  free  navigation  of  the  Mississippi,  they  also,  in 
the  same  act,  and  by  the  same  dauntless  spirit,  meant  to  enforce  that 
right  till  successful,  and  to  defend  it,  also,  when  once  acknowledged, 
as  they  afterwards  did  in  many  an  Indian  war,  as  well  as  on  the 
bloody  fields  of  New  Orleans.  It  is  no  new  principle  of  national  law, 
that  it  then  became  the  duty  of  the  whole  Union  to  look  over  the  lux- 
uriant regions  west  of  the  Alleghanies  with  the  same  affection  and  aid, 
and  lavish  on  them  a  like  deference  and  regard,  as  on  other  parts  of  the 
Union ;  and  that  only  half  our  obligations  would  be  discharged  in 
procuring  a  free  navigation  of  the  western  waters,  if  not  following  it 
up  with  procuring  security  to  that  navigation  and  the  immense  inter- 
ests connected  with  it.  Such  men  as  Messrs.  Gorham  and  Clymer 
had,  or  ought  to  have,  outgrown  their  more  narrow  views  and  sectional 
prejudices.  The  west  and  the  south-west  were,  by  the  tide  of  emigra- 
tion, becoming  bone  of  our  bone  and  flesh  of  our  flesh.  In  taking 
honest  pains  to  give  them  protection  as  well  as  prosperity,  the  position 
of  things  has  so  changed,  that  the  north  and  east,  and  Middle  States, 
are  in  truth  giving  them  to  their  own  families,  or  the  playmates  of 
their  youth.  Even  if  selfishness  prompted  a  different  course  in  1 785, 
it  will,  if  enlightened,  concur  in  the  course  recommended  in  1844. 
Let  me  particularize  a  single  illustration  of  this,  among  thousands  of 
like  cases  scattered  over  the  east,  and,  indeed,  the  whole  Atlantic 
States. 

On  one  of  the  hill-tops  in  the  interior  of  New  Hampshire,  only  two 
generations  ago,  dwelt  a  true,  enterprising,  industrious  New  England 
family.  Are  they  still  confined  to  their  native  mountains,  and  their 
interests  and  affections  centred  only  there?  On  the  contrary,  sir, 
some  of  them  are  felling  the  forests  in  the  mighty  west ;  others  plant 
in  the  sunny  south :  one  is  pushing  his  fortunes  in  the  Empire  State ; 


384  RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

another  in  Michigan  ;  another  in  Mississippi ;  another  on  the  rich  soil 
of  Alabama :  and  thus  their  homes  and  their  fortunes,  their  anxieties 
and  their  patriotism,  are  limited  only  by  their  country's  extent  and 
welfare.  The  next  generation  will  probably  see  some  of  their  descend- 
ants in  Oregon  or  Texas,  and  breathing  the  balmy  air  of  the  Columbia 
or  Rio  del  Norte. 

Such,  sir,  is  the  destiny  of  most  of  the  people  of  this  leading  repub- 
lic of  the  New  World,  presenting  a  form  of  government  as  novel  and 
striking  as  was  the  continent  itself  when  discovered  by  Columbus,  and 
developing  a  mission  on  earth,  by  this  branch  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  race, 
which,  while  the  school-house  and  village  church,  side  by  side,  mark 
their  progress,  will  never  be  completed  till  they  reach  the  Pacific.  The 
mass  of  them  are  not,  as  they  wander,  either  fanatics  or  bigots,  but 
conform  to  all  local  institutions  like  peaceable  citizens,  till  reason  and 
experience  are  able  to  work  salutary  changes. 

How  much  more  is  it  our  duty  to  receive  these  persons  into  the 
Union,  when  an  opportunity  offers,  than  the  French  of  Louisiana,  or 
the  Spaniards  of  Florida !  However  worthy,  in  many  respects,  the 
character  of  the  latter,  yet  all  must  see  that  the  moral  fitness,  the 
education,  habits,  and  religion,  of  most  of  our  kin  in  Texas,  render 
them  more  suitable  for  an  intimate  alliance  with  us ;  and  that  their 
republican  form  of  government  makes  the  Union  more  appropriate 
than  what  we  have  already  overcome  in  receiving  those  in  Louisiana 
and  Florida,  educated  under  monarchies.  Another  important  conse- 
quence of  the  purchase  of  Louisiana  was  to  give  greater  quiet  to  the 
commerce  and  people  on  all  the  tributaries  of  the  Mississippi,  as  well 
as  on  its  own  great  channel.  But,  parting  with  Texas,  we  lost  in  the 
same  treaty  the  sources  of  the  Arkansas  and  Red  rivers,  as  well  as 
large  tracts  of  land  adjoining ;  and,  unless  re-annexed,  a  door  is 
opened  for  constant  annoyances  and  collisions  between  us  and  those 
higher  up  on  the  stream,  and  one  cardinal  benefit  of  the  original 
purchase  is  entirely  relinquished. 

The  treaty  presents  at  the  same  moment  a  fortunate  occasion  to  do 
that,  as  well  as  enforce  better  the  guaranties  of  the  constitution ;  to 
promote  " domestic  tranquillity"  in  the  south  and  south-west,  no  less 
than  the  west  and  east.  The  property  and  domestic  institutions  of  the 
former,  however  different  from  those  at  the  north,  were  secured  as 
amply  under  the  old  Confederation  as  those  of  any  other  region.  So 
are  they  by  the  present  constitution ;  so  are  they  by  all  our  legislative 
and  judicial  decisions ;  and  so  must  they  continue  to  be,  till  the  com- 
promises of  the  constitution  are  wantonly  violated,  or  the  Union  dis- 
solved. Hence  the  losses  or  capture  of  their  property  in  slaves  have 
often  been  indemnified;  their  escape  into  other  States  has  been 
redressed  by  a  surrender  of  them ;  and  the  domestic  tranquillity 
designed  for  all  the  States,  as  set  out  in  the  preamble  of  the  constitu- 
tion as  one  paramount  object  for  its  adoption,  has  again  and  again  been 


KE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS.  385 

sought  to  be  secured,  in  times  of  excitement  and  peril,  precisely  as 
they  are  likely  to  be  by  the  ratification  of  this  treaty. 

In  1811,  the  executive  was  empowered  by  Congress,  after  careful 
deliberation  in  secret,  to  take  possession  of  Florida  by  force,  with  a 
view  to  preserve  more  undisturbed  the  domestic  relations  and  quiet 
of  the  south.  So,  in  1810,  Mr.  Madison,  of  his  own  motion,  took 
possession  of  the  country  east  of  Lake  Pontchartrain  to  the  river 
Perdido ;  for  this,  among  other  objects,  that  need  not  be  repeated. 
Though  his  course  was  then  denounced  as  war  by  his  opponents,  yet 
Congress,  by  an  act  in  1812,  ratified  it,  and  annexed  that  tract  to  the 
State  of  Louisiana ;  and  did  this  without  asking  the  consent  of  Spain, 
or  of  the  people  of  the  United  States,  or  of  the  inhabitants  of  the 
soil,  and  while  many  of  them  were  in  a  state  of  actual  revolt. 

Again :  in  1820,  for  the  same,  among  other  objects,  when  the 
treaty  for  the  cession  of  the  Floridas  remained  wrongfully  unratified 
by  Spain,  Mr.  Monroe  recommended  to  Congress  the  immediate  occu- 
pation of  that  country  by  virtue  of  legislation ;  and  this  was  prevented 
only  by  the  subsequent  ratification  and  peaceful  delivery  of  it,  without 
rendering  an  actual  resort  to  violence,  on  our  part,  necessary,  after  it 
had  been  proposed.    . 

In  short,  the  south  stood  shoulder  to  shoulder  with  us  in  the  Involu- 
tion, with  this  property  and  these  institutions.  They  came  into  the 
Union  with  them  on  equal  terms ;  they  have  so  remained  for  half  a 
century,  and  so  must  they  continue,  till  injustice  or  fanaticism  or  trea- 
son violate  all  the  sacred  compromises  of  all  we  hold  dear. 

The  ratification  of  this  treaty  is  also  vastly  important  to  our  whole 
people  in  an  industrial  point  of  view.  It  gives  to  us  enough  additional 
territory  for  four  or  five  large  States,  immediately  contiguous ;  and 
some  of  them,  by  their  location  on  the  ocean,  with  fine  bays  and 
immense  rivers,  virtually  Atlantic  States  in  their  habits  and  inter- 
course ;  an  increase  of  near  a  third  of  a  million  in  our  population, 
and  a  near  and  rich  outlet  for  the  overflowings  of  the  other  States, 
swelling,  as  they  must  in  the  next  fifty  years,  to  more  than  most  of 
the  kingdoms  of  Europe  in  their  mighty  masses.  The  annexation  of 
Texas,  in  its  influence  on  all  the  great  branches  of  industry,  is  not 
merely  a  western  or  southern  question,  but  one  deeply  interesting  to 
every  quarter  of  our  common  country, —  whether  it  promotes  that 
industry  by  opening  to  agriculture  more  fertile  soils  and  genial  climates, 
or  by  forming  a  wider  home  market  for  manufactures,  or  by  furnishing 
new  articles  of  commerce,  and  new  bays  and  rivers  for  the  free  navi- 
gation of  western  steamers,  as  well  as  coasting  and  freighting  vessels 
from  the  east.  Our  independence  of  other  countries,  by  more  lands, 
more  fitted  to  sugar,  fine  cotton,  and  rice,  and  even  coffee,  would  thus 
be  greatly  promoted. 

On  this  and  other  kindred  topics  I  shall  not,  on  this  occasion, 
enlarge ;  believing  that  a  very  strong  case  of  duty  to  take  the  cession 
33 


386  RE-ANNEXATION  OF  TEXAS. 

is  made  out,  unless  it  be  counterbalanced  by  some  of  the  objections 
which  have  been  urged  in  this  debate. 

I  proceed  at  once  to  examine,  in  some  detail,  the  most  prominent  of 
these  objections. 

The  annexation  is  opposed  by  some,  on  the  ground  that  it  will  make 
our  territory  too  large ;  but  experience  has  evinced  that  a  representa- 
tive republic  can,  with  convenience  and  efficiency,  extend  over  limits 
far  wider  than  from  the  St.  Croix  to  the  Rio  del  Norte.  Indeed,  by 
the  aid  of  railroads  and  steam,  the  Union,  with  Texas  included,  will 
be  far  more  accessible,  in  all  its  parts,  either  for  business  or  govern- 
ment, than  it  was  at  the  Revolution,  with  only  thirteen  States,  and 
those  all  situated  on  the  narrow  belt  of  the  eastern  declivity  of  the 
Alleghanies.  And  this  objection,  if  tenable,  should  have  been  urged, 
and  prevailed,  before  we  purchased  either  Louisiana  or  the  Floridas. 

How  groundless,  in  connection  with  this,  is  the  objection  by  some 
senators  (Messrs.  Miller  and  Choate),  that  duty  does  not  require 
assent  to  the  cession,  because  it  is  the  lust  for  "  territorial  aggrandize- 
ment" which  now  prompts  us;  when  the  whole  we  seek  was  not 
only  obtained  two  generations  ago,  but  was  justified  then  by  such 
men  as  Jefferson,  Madison,  and  Monroe,  and  advocated  since,  and 
attempted  to  be  regained,  by  such  men  as  Adams,  Clay,  and  Jack- 
son !  Or  because,  as  imputed  by  the  senator  from  New  Jersey,  we 
wish  to  seize  Texas  now  as  "  spoils  of  victory,"  "  as  a  conquest  by 
treaty  ;"  when,  in  truth,  she  comes  into  an  equal  union  of  rights  and 
privileges,  from  friendship  and  mutual  interest, —  from  choice, —  and 
suited  for  it  by  education  and  principles,  and  gaining  quite  as  much 
by  it  as  we,  or  as  Rhode  Island  gained  by  uniting  with  us  after  1789, 
or  as  Scotland  gained  by  her  union  with  England  near  the  commence- 
ment of  the  last  century  ! 

To  repeat  again  some  of  my  remarks  on  a  former  occasion  : 

"  The  annexation  has  been  opposed  as  not  a  duty,  because  inclining  the  balance  of 
political  power  in  our  system  too  much  in  favor  of  the  west  and  south.  But  the  same 
course  of  reasoning  would  strip  us  of  all  our  great  domain  on  the  Pacific  Ocean,  —  a 
country  never  to  be  surrendered  while  an  American  whaler  visits  its  waters,  or  an 
American  emigrant  chooses  to  fish,  hunt,  or  plant,  on  the  banks  of  the  Columbia.  It 
would  also,  from  like  apprehensions  as  to  the  balance  of  power  in  the  north,  prevent 
any  future  peaceable  annexation  of  the  Canadas,  so  ardently  contemplated  by  our 
fathers  from  the  commencement  of  the  Revolution  ;  and  it  would  heretofore  have 
defeated  the  purchase  of  the  Floridas  by  Mr.  Monroe,  and  of  Louisiana,  including 
Texas,  by  Mr.  Jefferson;  and  would  not  only  cast  censure  on  them  and  their  venera- 
ble coadjutors,  for  thus  deranging  the  balance  of  power  then,  but  would  add  reproach 
on  Messrs.  Adams  and  Clay,  for  attempting  to  regain  Texas  in  1825  and  1827,  and 
on  General  Jackson  and  Mr.  Van  Buren,  for  a  like  attempt  in  1829;  and,  what  is 
still  worse,  by  this  course  of  reasoning,  for  seeking,  as  was  done  in  1835,  by  General 
Jackson  and  Mr.  Forsyth,  to  obtain  a  vast  tract  of  additional  country  still  further 
south  and  west,  from  the  forty-second  degree  of  latitude  to  the  thirty-seventh,  and 
stretching  towards  the  setting  sun,  over  that  degree,  across  the  entire  continent. 
But,  in  truth,  the  durable  interests  of  the  whole  Union  are  believed  to  have  been 
looked  toon  those  occasions,  as  now;  and  the  theoretical  balance  of  power,  if  adverted 
to  at  all,  can  never  endanger  the  practical  workings  of  our  system,  which  will  always 
produce  greatest  harmony  when  least  influenced  by  any  sectional  jealousies  or  local 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  387 

prejudices;  and  "which  will  always  be  most  attractive,  strongest,  and  most  flourishing, 
where  freest,  unless  liberty  and  progress  are  mere  phantoms  of  the  imagination." 

More  than  all  this,  Texas,  if  added  to  the  Union,  may  well  be 
regarded,  for  ages,  if  not  forever,  quite  as  much  northern  as  western 
and  southern,  in  many  of  her  principles  and  tastes.  Her  position  on 
the  ocean,  her  numerous  and  large  rivers  near,  her  culture  of  sugar 
and  rice,  as  well  as  cotton,  her  easy  intercourse  with  the  West  Indies 
and  the  north,  make  her  an  Atlantic  State  for  most  purposes,  and  will 
connect  her  people,  in  their  intercourse  and  commerce,  and  views  of 
political  economy,  very  closely  with  the  Atlantic  portion  of  the  Union ; 
and  perhaps  more  intimately  with  the  northern  parts  of  it  than  many 


"  It  is  opposed  by  others  on  account  of  the  badness  of  some  of  the  reasons  assigned 
for  it;  as  if  a  good  measure  ought  to  be  rejected  because  any  one  may  please  to  urge 
some  weak  reasons  for  it.  By  others,  because  a  few  of  its  advocates  are  suspected  of 
being  interested  in  the  question ;  as  if  that  could  impair  the  usefulness  of  the  annex- 
ation itself,  or  was  not  always  an  incident  to  almost  every  question  of  great  magni- 
tude. And  by  others  still,  because  the  auspices  under  which  the  measure  is  now 
proposed  are  disliked ;  as  if  the  necessity  or  value  of  a  gift  or  purchase  depended 
upon  the  character  of  the  agents  employed. 

"It  is  resisted  by  many  for  the  reason  that  slavery  exists  in  Texas.  That  is  an 
institution,  to  be  sure,  which  most  people  born  at  the  north  are,  like  myself,  averse 
to.  But  those  who  respect  the  constitution  and  the  Union  remember  that  it  is  an 
institution  which  our  parent  country,  before  the  Revolution,  forced  upon  both  the 
north  and  the  south;  which,  after  being  more  deeply  interwoven  through  the  social 
and  political  systems  of  the  latter,  the  rest  of  the  States  did  not  hesitate  to  confed- 
erate with  her  in  fighting  the  battles  of  independence;  nor  to  counsel  with  her  heroes, 
patriots,  and  statesmen,  informing  the  present  constitution;  nor  to  associate  with 
them  in  carrying  out  its  great  destinies ;  nor  in  guaranteeing  their  property  and  rights 
in  common  with  the  rest,  then  and  during  the  half-century  since,  in  peace  and  war, 
and  in  weal  or  woe. 

"However  deprecated  by  many  of  us,  we  know  that  none  can  legally  abolish  the 
institution  but  those  who  possess  it;  and  that  while  this  has  already  been  done,  since 
the  Revolution,  by  nearly  half  of  the  old  States,  it  may  continue  to  be  done  by  Texas 
herself,  as  well  as  others,  sooner  or  later,  when  their  sense  of  duty  and  safety  may 
permit  it,  if  left  tranquilly  to  the  exercise  of  their  own  rights.  What  effect  the  annex- 
ation of  Texas  will  really  have  on  this  measure  seems  to  be  doubted  by  some  of  its 
opponents,  among  whom  the  most  distinguished  thinks  it  will  add  more  free  than 
slave  States.  But,  however  that  may  be,  the  friends  of  annexation  believe  that,  while 
a  rejection  of  it  must  leave  the  institution  of  slavery  just  as  it  is,  without  mitigation, 
the  acceptance  of  it  cannot  add  to  the  whole  number  of  slaves  now  in  Texas  and  the 
United  States  together;  and,  if  dispersing  that  number  over  a  wider  space,  will  grad- 
ually tend  to  make  their  freedom  less  expensive  and  more  easy  in  any  one  State;  or, 
if  concentrating  them  further  south  than  now,  will  render  voluntary  emancipation 
more  northwardly  still  speedier  and  safer.  Whether  such  considerations  have  pre- 
ponderated before,  in  overcoming  this  objection,  with  many  of  our  most  eminent 
friends  of  liberty  and  philanthropy,  I  know  not;  but  certain  it  is  that  it  did  not 
prevent  Mr.  Jefferson  and  his  northern  democratic  friends  from  purchasing  Louis- 
iana, including  Texas  herself,  in  1803;  nor  Florida  from  being  bought  by  Messrs, 
Monroe  and  Adams,  in  1819;  nor  Texas  again  from  being  negotiated  for  by  Messrs, 
Adams  and  Clay,  in  1825  and  1827;  and  by  General  Jackson  and  Mr.  Van  Buren, 
in  the  summer  of  1829 ;  the  decree  of  Mexico  for  abolishing  slavery  in  her  posses- 
sions not  being  issued  till  September  15,  1829."  (See  4  Blunt's  Annual  Register, 
p.  147.) 

It  did  not  prevent  us  from  keeping  Texas,  with  all  her  slavery,  for 


388  RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

sixteen  years,  and  then  exchanging  her  for  another  slave  territory. 
Is  it  not  safer  to  act  with  such  men  on  a  great  national  question?  men 
of  all  parties,  coincident  on  this  single  measure,  notwithstanding  the 
objection  as  to  slavery  ?  Much  safer  than  to  indulge  rashly  in  a  dis- 
regard of  every  precedent  and  principle  adopted  in  respect  to  it  during 
half  a  century. 

International  interferences,  or  encouragements,  to  destroy  the  domes- 
tic or  political  institutions  of  each  other,  are  alike  mischievous,  whether 
attempted  by  us  against  her  church-and-state  system  and  monarchical 
government,  or  by  England,  or  the  world's  convention  in  sight  of  her 
Parliament,  against  any  of  our  institutions.  Without  going  into  details 
on  this  unpleasant  topic,  these  officious  complaints  about  us  tend  to 
plunge  the  world  into  a  state  of  constant  warfare,  rather  than  promote 
durable  peace  and  civilization. 

Even  the  despot  Santa  Anna  talks  of  keeping  up  hostilities  against 
Texas  in  order  to  put  down  domestic  slavery  there ;  and  Ali  Pacha, 
in  Egypt,  while  amidst  all  his  tyrannies  he  has  the  address  towards 
England  to  profess  the  emancipation  of  his  slaves,  renews  yearly  a 
frontier  slave-hunt,  to  recruit  his  armies,  navies,  and  household. 

What  is  this  objection,  when  made  among  ourselves  so  pertinaciously, 
but  a  violation  of  Washington's  farewell  injunction  against  encouraging 
sectional  prejudices  and  sectional  divisions  ;  and  of  Jefferson's  depreca- 
tions, in  the  Missouri  controversy,  against  the  drawing  of  "a  geograph- 
ical line,  coinciding  with  a  marked  principle,  moral  and  political;"  and 
which,  if  countenanced,  would,  in  his  opinion,  constantly  sink  deeper 
and  deeper,  and  never  be  obliterated,  except  by  disastrous  results, 
which  he  did  not  wish  to  live  long  enough  to  witness  ?  (4  Jefferson's 
Life,  324  p.) 

Declaring,  as  we  have  so  often,  that  Cuba  shall  never  be  allowed  to 
go  into  the  possession  of  another  power,  I  should  like  to  know  what  is 
to  be  done  with  slavery  there,  if  the  island  is  ever  occupied  by  us. 
And  if  becoming  a  territory  or  a  State,  on  what  principle  is  it  to  be 
so,  except  that  applied  to  Louisiana,  Florida,  and  therefore  to  Texas  % 
Are  we  to  have  whites  under  our  dominion  not  free,  nor  ever  to  be 
admitted  into  the  Union  on  equal  principles  7 

I  will  only  add,  in  order  to  avoid  misapprehension,  that  so  far  from 
feeling  opposed  to  the  termination  of  slavery  by  all  legal,  safe,  and 
constitutional  means,  none  could  rejoice  more  heartily  than  myself  to 
see  it  thus  ended,  the  world  over ;  and  among  the  whites,  as  well  as 
blacks  ;  —  among  the  disfranchised,  the  serfs  and  paupers,  of  Europe, 
and  even  the  dark  Hindoos,  as  well  as  the  sable  sons  of  Africa ; — not 
confining  my  sympathies  to  color  or  name,  but  to  real  degradation 
among  the  whole  human  race,  and  to  their  relief  by  introducing  grad- 
ually a  superior  state  of  intelligence,  religion,  and  rights,  rather  than 
by  a  rash  crusade  against  law  and  order,  and  the  public  peace. 

Others  still  object  to  the  form  of  the  cession,  holding  it  to  be  insuf- 
ficient, unless  made  by  an  act  of  Congress,  and  hence  it  is  not  our 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  389 

duty  to  take  the  cession  by  this  treaty.  Various  technicalities  as  to 
the  power  of  treaties  have  been  urged  against  the  present  proceeding, 
such  as  the  want  of  existing  parties  till  the  act  is  completed,  and  the 
absence  of  legislative  as  well  as  executive  sanction  to  the  union  of  the 
two  countries.  But  the  people  of  Texas  still  continue  a  separate 
independent  government,  competent  to  contract  and  hold  their  rights, 
not  only  till  the  treaty  is  ratified  by  our  government  and  their  own, 
but  till  an  act  of  Congress,  there  and  here,  passes  to  enforce  many 
provisions,  which,  in  their  nature,  as  in  many  other  treaties,  are 
imperfect  and  inoperative  till  that  takes  place.  And  if  the  sanction 
of  their  people  to  a  union  like  this,  given  at  the  same  time  their  con- 
stitution was  adopted,  by  an  almost  unanimous  vote,  was  supposed  to 
be  obsolete,  I  should  think  it  prudent  to  take  their  opinion  again  before 
the  proceedings  are  deemed  complete.  Then,  and  not  till  all  this  is 
concluded,  an  actual  delivery  of  possession  takes  place,  and  is  neces- 
sary to  the  validity  of  the  cession.  (1  Kent's  Com.,  177.)  Nor 
even  after  that  is  Texas  extinguished,  as  some  have  argued ;  she  is 
still  in  political  being,  as  a  territory  of  the  Union,  and  with  full  claims 
to  enforce  her  rights,  in  due  time,  and  on  equal  terms,  to  become  a 
State. 

An  act  of  legislation  in  the  form  of  a  compact  is  no  stronger  than  a 
law  of  Congress  carrying  the  treaty  into  effect  by  establishing  a  terri- 
torial government,  and  making  the  proper  appropriations  and  provi- 
sions. If  these  are  done,  then  our  people  have  assented  through  their 
proper  and  accustomed  agents  for  such  purposes  ;  and  Congress  has 
assented,  as  well  as  Texas,  both  its  government  and  people.  We  shall 
stand  towards  each  other  in  all  these  respects,  and  shall  continue  to,  as 
we  and  our  new  separate  States  and  territories  do.  The  matter  has 
thus  duly  commenced  with  a  treaty.  We  take  by  it  one  step.  A 
treaty,  too,  is  the  usual  instrument  for  making  agreements  with  for- 
eign powers.  It  is  defined  to  be  "  a  compact  of  accommodation  relat- 
ing to  public  affairs."  And  if  enforced  by  an  act  of  Congress  carrying 
its  provisions  into  effect,  it  will  have  all  the  form  and  substance,  in  its 
course  to  completion,  which  any  legislative  compact  of  union  between 
countries  before  in  domestic  relations  could  possess  in  England  or 
here. 

Some  confusion  has  arisen  on  this  point,  I  apprehend,  from  not 
adverting  to  the  circumstance  that,  in  this  case,  the  ceded  territory 
and  its  government  are  foreign,  and  not  like  those  using  legislation 
alone,  already  in  some  degree  connected  as  domestic  members  of  the 
same  sovereign,  like  Scotland  and  Ireland.  And  so  far  from  Texas 
being  thus  conquered,  or  annihilated,  or  degraded,  or  defrauded,  she 
is  elevated  to  our  own  platform  ;  her  privileges  gained  are  quite  equal 
to  ours ;  her  star  is  placed  in  our  galaxy,  rather  than  extinguished ; 
and  the  union  is  alike  honorable  and  advantageous  to  all  concerned. 

Another  new  objection  has  been  pressed,  that  the  cession  contains 
too  much  land;  and  is  thus  not  a  duty,  but  a  wrong,  and  exposes  us  to 
33* 


390  RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

unavoidable  collisions  with  other  powers.  But,  unfortunately  for  this 
ground,  the  cession  does  not  describe  any  particular  quantity  of  land, 
or  extend  the  limits  of  Texas  to  any  specified  boundaries  whatever.  It 
merely,  in  speaking  of  its  extent,  says,  "all  its  territories."  We  can 
hold,  then,  or  claim,  only  "all  its  territories," — its  true  and  rightful 
boundaries,  be  they  more  or  less.  So  was  it  with  the  purchase  of 
Louisiana,  without  any  other  limitations ;  and  Bonaparte  declined  to 
make  any  specific  ones,  when  asked  (See  Marbois'  History  of  Louis- 
iana), but  for  a  reason  directly  the  reverse  to  that  which  existed  here, 
"the  boundary  being  left  without  specification"  here  in  order  to  avoid 
difficulty.     (See  the  Texian  documents.) 

The  better  opinion  certainly  is,  that  the  old  Texas  run  west  to 
the  mouth  of  the  Rio  Del  Norte,  on  the  gulf;  though  Mr.  Jeffer- 
son, as  a  compromise,  was  willing  to  stop  at  the  Nueces  or  Color- 
ado, and  even  the  Guadaloupe ;  and  General  Jackson,  in  1829,  pro- 
posed to  buy  only  to  the  centre  of  the  desert  between  the  Nueces  and 
the  Rio  Del  Norte  ;  but  in  1835  he  wished  to  go  quite  to  the  latter, 
as  did  Messrs.  Adams  and  Clay,  in  1825  and  1827.  (Doc.  House 
of  Reps.,  Sept.  1837,  on  Texas,  2  Foote's  History,  393.) 

Most  people  considered  the  line  to  run  north  on  that  river  only  to 
the  mountains,  though  the  legislature  of  Texas,  by  a  law,  have  claimed 
to  run  to  its  source.  But  Texas,  by  a  mere  law,  could  acquire  no 
title  beyond  what  she  conquered  from  Mexico,  and  actually  governed. 
Hence,  though  her  law  includes  more  than  the  ancient  Texas,  she 
could  hold  and  convey  only  that ;  or,  at  the  uttermost,  only  what  she 
exercised  clear  jurisdiction  over.  As  to  that,  there  is  and  can  be  no 
eventual  contest ;  and  the  deed  of  cession,  like  one  by  an  individual 
at  common  law,  would  practically  pass  no  more  than  was  owned ;  and 
under  it  the  grantee  would  get  no  more  if  he  could,  and  could  not  if 
he  would.* 

*  The  law  of  Texas,  including  in  her  claim  more  than  she  actually  occupied,  doubt- 
less originated  very  innocently,  in  the  following  section  of  the  compact  by  Santa  Anna 
with  President  Burnet,  in  1836,  agreeing  solemnly  that  Texas  should  extend  not  only 
to  the  mouth  of  the  Rio  Del  Norte,  but  thence  to  its  source  : 

"Fifth.  That  the  following  be  and  the  same  are  hereby  established  and  made 
the  lines  of  demarcation  between  the  two  republics  of  Mexico  and  of  Texas,  to  wit : 
The  line  shall  commence  at  the  estuary  or  mouth  of  the  Rio  Grande,  on  the  western 
bank  thereof,  and  shall  pursue  the  same  bank  up  the  said  river  to  the  point  where  the 
river  assumes  the  name  of  the  Rio  Bravo  Del  Norte,  from  which  point  it  shall  pro- 
ceed on  the  said  western  bank  to  the  head  waters  or  source  of  said  river,  —  it  being 
understood  that  the  terms  Rio  Grande  and  Rio  Bravo  Del  Norte  apply  to  and  desig- 
nate one  and  the  same  stream.  From  the  source  of  said  river,  —  the  principal  head 
branch  being  taken  to  ascertain  that  source,  —  a  due  north  line  shall  be  run  until  it 
shall  intersect  the  boundary  line  established  and  described  in  the  treaty  negotiated 
by  and  between  the  government  of  Spain  and  the  government  of  the  United  States,  of 
the  north ;  which  line  was  subsequently  transferred  to  and  adopted  in  the  treaty  of 
limits  made  between  the  government  of  Mexico  and  that  of  the  United  States;  and 
from  this  point  of  intersection  the  line  shall  be  the  same  as  was  made  and  established 
in  and  by  the  several  treaties  above-mentioned,  to  continue  to  the  mouth  or  outlet  of 
the  Sabine  river,  and  from  thence  to  the  Gulf  of  Mexico."  (See  2  Foote's  His.,  314, 
compact  between  Texas  and  Santa  Anna,  in  1836.) 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS.  391 

Another  reason  assigned  why  it  is  not  our  duty  to  accept  this  ces- 
sion is,  that  the  Senate,  by  ratifying  the  treaty,  do,  in  conjunction 
with  the  President,  declare  war ;  when,  by  the  constitution,  it  cannot 
be  declared  without  the  consent  of  the  whole  of  Congress.  This 
entirely  falls  to  the  ground,  if  my  views  are  right,  that  all  treaties  like 
this  are  inoperative  till  a  law  of  Congress  passes  to  carry  them  into 
effect.  For  then,  before  its  validity  is  perfected  so  as  to  produce  war, 
the  whole  of  Congress  assents.  Even  in  England,  an  act  of  Parlia- 
ment is  necessary  to  give  effect  to  some  treaties,  as  was  held  here  in 
Jay's  treaty  in  1796,  and  in  other  treaties  after  the  late  war,  as 
well  as  in  the  treaties  for  purchasing  Louisiana  and  the  Floridas. 
Whenever  money  is  to  be  paid,  or  officers  appointed,  and  a  territorial 
government  organized,  an  act  of  Congress  is  indispensable  to  complete 
its  operations.  Hence,  without  going  into  the  question,  how  wide  a 
range  of  discretion  exists  in  passing  or  not  passing  such  an  act,  war  is 
not  declared  or  waged  till  Congress  chooses  to  do  it  by  a  subsequent 
act.  If,  before  that,  it  is  commenced  against  us  wrongfully,  as  it  may 
be  on  this  or  any  other  occasion,  Congress  still  retains  the  power  to 
repel  it  or  negotiate.  On  the  very  theory  upon  the  other  side,  the 
act  of  the  President  and  Senate  alone,  so  far  as  regards  war,  is  beyond 
its  authority,  and  nugatory  by  the  constitution.  How,  then,  can  the 
President  and  Senate  alone  make  or  wage  a  war  ?  and  how  ill-grounded 
are  the  fears  that,  by  ratifying  the  treaty,  the  Senate  compromises  the 
country  in  hostilities !  • :    :        -  -   ;   . 

The  Senate  and  President  can  form  a  treaty  of  alliance ;  but  the 
country  cannot,  and  will  not,  thereby  be  plunged  into  a  war,  unless 
Congress  assent.  So,  on  the  other  hand,  they  form  a  treaty  of  neu- 
trality or  of  peace ;  and  yet  the  country  will  not  and  cannot  be  retained 
in  a  state  of  peace,  if  Congress  pleases  to  declare  war.  (See  4  Jeffer- 
son's Life,  page  498.) 

At  the  utmost,  in  this  case,  the  President  and  the  Senate  cannot 
adopt  anything  which  does  not  exist;  and,  therefore,  as  only  a  liability 
exists  to  war,  they  can  adopt  but  a  liability,  and  not  war  itself;  and 
that  liability  is  neither  just  in  itself  nor  countenanced  by  the  rest  of 
the  world.  The  utmost  which  the  ratification  accomplishes,  even 
were  the  treaty  operative  without  an  act  of  Congress,  is  to  adapt  or 
expose  ourselves  to  the  state  of  things  which  exists  now  between 
Mexico  and  Texas. 

We  will  soon  endeavor  to  show  that  this  state  is  now  but  construct- 
ive war ;  that  its  actual  renewal  would  be  unjust ;  that  the  conduct- 


And  some  articles  in  the  newspapers,  very  ably  written,  in  1829,  had  also  insisted 
that  the  country  ceded  and  lost  by  us  in  1819  contained  225,000,000  of  acres. 
Whereas  the  whole  land  claimed  by  Texas,  rightfully  or  wrongfully,  and  in  actual 
possession  or  not,  and  whether  too  much  or  too  little, .  is  only  203,320,000  acres, 
according  to  the  official  map  before  us;  and  that  number  of  acres  claimed  in  1829 
cannot  be  obtained  without  going  to  the  utmost  limit  of  the  boundaries  since  laid 
down  on  this  map,  on  the  south  and  north  and  east,  as  well  as  west. 


392  RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

ing  of  it,  if  as  formerly,  is  contrary  to  the  law  of  nations ;  and  hence, 
so  far  from  assuming  what  is  either  dangerous  or  just,  we  shall  per- 
form a  national  duty  to  interfere  in  this  matter  by  negotiation,  and 
hazard  something,  if  necessary,  to  prevent  a  recurrence  of  more  such 
bloodshed,  as  well  as  restore  tranquillity  and  durable  peace  to  this 
quarter  of  the  globe. 

Some  have  magnified  the  danger  of  war,  and  even  proclaimed  it  as 
war  itself,  that  the  President  has  ordered  a  portion  of  our  army  and 
navy  to  the  points  which  will  be  most  exposed,  in  case  Mexico  com- 
mences threatened  hostilities  against  us,  or  the  renewal  of  old  ones 
against  Texas. 

But  these  movements  are  all  with  a  view  to  the  preservation  of 
peace,  rather  than  the  waging  of  war.  They  are  precautionary  and 
prudent,  rather  than  belligerent.  The  officers  are  in  all  cases  expressly 
forbidden  to  engage  in  hostilities,  but  required  merely  to  watch  and 
report  facts.  The  same  was  done  in  1829,  by  Gen.  Jackson.  (See  2 
Kennedy,  242,  265,  and  276.)  And  in  1837,  by  Mr.  Van  Buren; 
and  at  the  east  on  the  disputed  territory,  as  well  as  in  Texas  beyond 
the  Sabine.  The  chief  difference  is,  that  in  this  case  more  forbear- 
ance and  caution  appear,  and  not  a  single  line  of  boundary  is  allowed 
to  be  crossed,  nor  a  gun  fired,  without  authority  of  Congress,  nor  a 
single  dollar  of  new  expense  incurred.  (See  the  official  document.) 
In  1810  we  had  the  first  edition  of  this  cry  of  war,  for  marching 
troops.  That  was  a  much  stronger  case;  for  Mr.  Madison  then 
marched  troops  into  a  disputed  territory,  and  used  force  to  get  posses- 
sion of  it.  He  was  met  with  the  same  complaint  of  war  and  assump- 
tion of  the  powers  of  the  two  Houses. 

Mr.  Horsey,  one  of  the  ablest  federalists,  exclaimed : 

"  Sir,  what  is  the  nature  and  import  of  this  proclamation  ?  In  my  humble  con- 
ception, both  legislative  and  war.  War,  because  it  directs  the  occupation  of  this  ter- 
ritory by  a  military  force.  The  regular  troops  of  the  United  States  are  ordered  to 
march,  and  aid  the  militia,  if  necessary. 

"  Legislative,  by  annexing  it  to  Orleans  territory."  (See  Nat.  Int.,  1st  January, 
1810.) 

But  no  impeachment  was  ever  presumed  on,  for  that  or  other  sup- 
posed misbehavior,  except  that  James  Madison,  the  great  expounder 
and  practitioner  under  the  constitution  in  our  most  trying  times,  was, 
by  Cyrus  King,  denounced  as,  in  his  estimation,  deserving  a  halter, 
and  by  Josiah  Quincy,  who,  I  believe,  obtained  one  vote,  solitary  and 
alone,  in  favor  of  his  impeachment. 

The  use  of  the  army  and  navy  by  the  executive,  in  time  of  peace, 
may  often  expose  the  country  to  war ;  but  it  is  not,  and  cannot  be,  a 
declaration  of  war  on  our  part,  as  that  can  only  be  made  by  Congress. 
True,  in  1831,  the  administration  sent  a  part  of  the  navy  around  the 
globe,  and  attacked  and  burnt  a  town  a,t  the  antipodes.  But  it  was 
not  a  declaration  of  war ;  on  the  contrary,  it  was  provident  protection 
in  peace  of  our  citizens  and  their  commerce.     And  though  it  might 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  393 

have  been  deemed  by  others  a  cause  of  war  on  us,  and  a  matter  of 
impeachment  here,  as  was  threatened,  yet  it  was,  in  truth,  none  the 
less  right  and  justifiable,  both  under  our  own  constitution  and  the 
laws  of  nations.  I  advised  it  then,  and  gave  the  order ;  and  would  do 
it  again,  under  like  circumstances. 

The  next  and  the  most  alarming  objection,  with  many,  to  its  being 
our  duty  to  take  the  cession  of  Texas,  is,  that  we  are  thus  assuming  an 
actual  war,  or  are  in  danger  of  becoming  involved  in  actual  hostilities. 
If  this  were  the  truth,  it  would  then  surely  behoove  us  not  to  risk 
these  without  counting  the  cost,  or  finding,  after  careful  examination, 
that  our  duty  to  take  the  cession  was,  under  all  the  circumstances, 
paramount  to  all  such  dangers. 

Though  war  be  undoubtedly  a  great  calamity,  standing  by  itself, 
yet  it  is  often  much  preferable  to  dishonor ;  is  often  expedient  for  self- 
preservation  ;  and,  at  times,  is  demanded  by  the  highest  obligations  of 
national  honor  and  duty. 

Let  us,  then,  first  see  whether  the  danger  to  which  we  are  exposed, 
by  taking  the  cession,  has  heretofore  been  deemed  sufficient  to  prevent 
our  taking  it.  In  1825,  Spain  and  Mexico  were  at  war,  and  the  for- 
mer in  actual  possession  of  the  most  important  fortress  of  the  country ; 
and  in  1829,  poured  her  troops  into  Mexico  in  flagrante  hello.  And 
that  state  of  things  was  even  urged  by  our  government  as  an  addi- 
tional inducement  to  Mexico  alone  to  cede  Texas,  rather  than  regard- 
ing it,  as  would  seem  now,  an  insuperable  obstacle  to  a  proper  cession 
without  the  consent  of  both  belligerents,  or  without  our  becoming 
involved  in  hostilities  which  it  may  not  be  our  duty  to  risk. 

Some  seem  to  doubt  the  existence  of  as  much  war  then  as  now,  and 
would  thus  break  the  great  and  acknowledged  force  of  these  two  cases, 
as  precedents  directly  in  point. 

But  how  are  the  recorded  facts  1 

Beside  many  statements  in  the  public  press,  cited  by  the  senator 
from  Mississippi,  showing  the  actual  war  then,  there  are  many  other 
proofs. 

Mr.  Clay,  May  10th,  1825,  while  negotiating,  exhorted  Russia  to 
make  Spain  acknowledge  the  independence  of  her  colonies,  and  restore 
peace,  instead  of  the  war  then  known  to  be  raging.  He  threatened 
that  otherwise  the  provinces  should  send  privateers  on  the  coast  of 
Spain,  and  capture  Cuba,  "towards  terminating  the  existing  contest 
between  Spain  and  her  colonies."  (Blount,  83  p.)  He  urged  the 
emperor  to  lend  his  aid  towards  the  "  conclusion  of  the  war  between 
Spain  and  her  colonies."  (Letter  to  Middleton,  89  p.,  Aug.  27, 1825.) 
The  castle  of  Ulloa — the  key  of  Mexico— was  then  in  possession  of 
Spain ;  and  yet  no  forbearance  or  objections  were  then  entertained  on 
account  of  the  claims,  interests,  or  complaints,  of  Spain. 

Further  than  this :  how  stood  the  case  in  1829  ?  Then,  our  Secre- 
tary speaks  of  the  particularly  threatening  attitude  of  Spain,  and  the 
"  policy  to  part  with  a  portion  to  obtain  means  to  defend  the  residue." 


394  HE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

(P.  15,  House  Doc,  No.  40,  Sept.  1837.)  The  President  not  only 
admitted  the  existence  of  actual  war  with  Spain  in  September,  1829 
(Niles'  Register,  71),  but  our  government,  beside  the  above  argu- 
ment, founded  on  the  existence  of  hostilities,  despatched  a  naval  force 
to  the  coast  of  Mexico  to  protect  our  commerce  during  the  war.  And 
the  Mexican  Secretary  of  State  subsequently,  in  a  public  enunciation, 
made  it  a  topic  of  complaint  against  the  United  States,  that  our  admin- 
istration, under  the  distractions  and  perils  of  their  conflict  with  Spain, 
—  or,  to  use  his  own  words,  while  engaged  "in  repelling  the  Spanish 
invasion, — had  pushed  for  a  cession  of  Mexico,  under  the  hope  that 
Mexico  would  then  part  with  Texas  more  readily."  (See  the  docu- 
ment in  Adams'  speech,  in  National  Intelligencer  of  19th  July,  1838.) 
Yet  no  apprehension  of  being  involved  in  a  war  then  obstructed  our 
negotiations,  and  was  deemed  sufficient  to  obviate  our  duty  to  obtain 
the  cession.  Nor  was  any  apprehension  then  felt  that  our  duty  was 
violated  by  taking  the  cession  from  Mexico  during  an  actual  war  with 
Spain,  and  eight  to  ten  years  before  the  latter  made  any  recognition 
of  the  independence  of  the  former.  Nothing  was  communicated  to 
Spain  asking  her  consent ;  no  offer  was  made  to  her  of  compensation ; 
nothing  deprecated  as  to  her  hostility. 

And  who  ever  then  heard,  as  now,  that  a  purchase  from  Mexico 
would  be  perfidious  towards  unoffending  Spain  ?  a  breach  of  the  solem- 
nity of  our  treaties  with  her  1  or  an  exposure  of  ourselves  to  the  con- 
demnation of  the  civilized  world,  as  grasping  and  ambitious  ? 

But,  aside  from  these  precedents,  showing  the  sense  of  duty  which 
urged  onward  to  this  acquisition  both  Messrs.  Adams  and  Clay,  as 
well  as  Jackson  and  Van  Buren,  notwithstanding  the  actual  war  then 
raging,  it  may  be  well  to  ascertain  whether  any  actual  war  exists  now, 
as  well  as  whether  one  has  of  late  been  waged,  in  a  manner  to  justify 
its  long  continuance,  either  against  Texas  or  any  power  that  may 
become  allied  to  her.  All  the  categorical  assertions  that  an  actual 
war  has  been  carried  on  by  Mexico  for  eight  years  past,  and  with 
great  vigor  and  success  (Mr.  Choate),  and  in  a  humane  form  beyond 
even  that  pursued  usually  by  either  England  or  France,  are  disproved, 
not  only  by  the  ministers  of  Texas,  entitled  by  their  stations  to  full 
credence,  but  by  Mr.  Webster  himself,  in  his  grave  official  character  as 
Secretary  of  State. 

Let  us  read  what  he,  as  well  as  they,  state  on  the  point  of  an  actual 
war  during  that  eight  years  : 

"  From  the  time  of  the  battle  of  San  Jacinto,  in  April,  1836,  to  the  present 
moment,  Texas  had  exhibited  the  same  external  signs  of  national  independence  as 
Mexico  herself,  and  with  quite  as  much  stability  of  government ;  practically  free 
and  independent,  acknowledged  as  a  political  sovereignty  by  the  principal  powers  of 
the  world,  no  hostile  foot  finding  rest  within  her  territory  for  six  or  seven  years,  and 
Mexico  herself  refraining  for  all  that  period  from  any  further  attempt  to  reestablish 
her  own  authority  over  that  territory."     (Webster,  July  1,  1842,  to  Thompson.) 

Yet,  in  the  face  of  this,  the  Senator  from  Massachusetts  (Mr. 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  395 

Choate)  speaks  of  the  "tremendous  vigor  with  which  Mexico  had 
carried  on  the  war;"  and  "her  effective  success;"  and  her  "armed 
occupation  "  of  Texas. 

Again,  Mr.  Webster  says,  after  the  battle  of  San  Jacinto,  "  The 
war  was  from  that  time  at  an  end." 

In  another  letter  (of  April  5,  1842,  Webster  to  Thompson,  4th 
Senate  Document,  No.  325,  in  1842,  p.  13),  he  says : 

"  No  effort  for  the  subjugation  of  Texas  has  been  made  by  Mexico  from  the  time  of 
the  battle  of  San  Jacinto,  on  the  21st  April,  1836,  until  the  commencement  of  the 
present  year  ;  and  during  all  this  period  Texas  has  maintained  an  independent  gov- 
ernment, carried  on  commerce,  and  made  treaties  with  nations  in  both  hemispheres, 
and  kept  aloof  all  attempts  at  invading  her  territory." 

Again,  Mr.  Webster  says  to  Mr.  Thompson,  31st  July,  1843 : 

"  It  is  contemplated  by  this  government  to  remonstrate  in  a  more  formal  man- 
ner with  Mexico,  at  a  period  not  far  distant,  unless  she  shall  consent  to  make  peace 
with  Texas,  or  shall  show  the  disposition  and  ability  to  prosecute  the  war  with 
respectable  forces.'" 

Finally,  22d  June,  1842,  Mr.  Webster  to  Thompson,  says  :  "  Noth- 
ing is  more  probable  than  that  the  reneival  of  the  war  between  Mexico 
and  Texas  would,"  &c. 

He  states  "  the  President's  clear  and  strong  conviction  that  the  war 
is  not  only  tiseless,  but  hopeless,  without  attainable  object;  injurious 
to  both  parties,  and  likely  to  be,  in  its  continuance,  annoying  and 
vexatious  to  other  commercial  nations." 

This  is  quite  enough  from  one  Secretary,  and  he  the  senator's 
political  friend,  to  show  the  impotent  and  irregular  and  censurable 
character  of  the  hostilities  as  designed  for  any  re-conquest.  Similar 
were  the  views  of  his  successor. 

Mr.  Upshur  to  Mr.  Thompson,  27th  July,.  1843,  says,  also,  that 
"  the  present  hostilities  are  not  regular,  and  hardly  civilized ;  tend  only 
to  harass,  and  not  subdue.  Mexico  should  assert  and  maintain  her 
supremacy,  or  generously  abandon  the  claim." 

"  She  has  a  right  to  re-conquer;  but  her  right  must  be  enforced 
seasonably,  or  be  abandoned  for  the  peace  and  commerce  of  the  rest 
of  the  world." 

The  views  of  the  Texian  authorities  correspond  with  this  :  "  Never, 
since  1836,  has  Mexico  attempted  anything  of  the  character  of  a  gen- 
eral invasion  of  Texas,  or  conducted  the  war  upon  any  plan  calculated 
to  test  the  superiority  of  the  two  nations  upon  the  field  of  battle,  and 
bring  the  war  to  a  close  by  the  arbitrament  of  arms."  (Confidential 
document,  12th  and  15th  pp.) 

How  justly,  then,  can  it  be  said : 

"  Scarce  a  hostile  foot,  even  from  Mexico,  profaned  her  soil,  from  1836,  when  Santa 
Anna  publicly  stipulated  with  her  to  end  the  war,  to  1842." 


396  RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

This,  if  no  more,  was  to  be  expected,  after  his  pledges  and  compacts. 
The  express  engagement  made  by  Santa  Anna,  May  18th,  1836,  to 
put  an  end  to  the  war,  and  obtain  the  recognition  of  her  independence 
by  Mexico,  is  at  length  in  Niles'  Register,  414  p.,  for  Aug.  1836. 
(2  Kennedy,  233.)  See  his  reasons  for  it,  in  his  letter  to  Houston, 
and  conversation  here.  (Niles'  Register,  9th  and  23d  April,  1842.) 
The  compliance  with  it  since,  so  far  as  regards  any  regular  war,  or  one 
in  any  degree  competent  or  designed  for  a  re-conquest,  is  the  only  apol- 
ogy he  can  have  for  not  surrendering  himself  and  his  troops  again  to 
Texas,  for  a  failure  by  Mexico  to  fulfil  the  rest  of  it.  Honor  and 
morality  forbid  his  conduct  in  not  returning,  unless  he  intended  virtually 
to  end  the  war,  in  pursuance  of  his  engagement. 

The  declarations  made  by  him  in  this  city  confess  all  thfe.  So  those 
made  after  his  reaching  home,  and  when  free  from  any  suspicion  of 
fear  or  duress,  confirm  the  same  aspect  of  the  case.  In  a  letter  which 
he  addressed  to  General  Jackson,  dated  at  Columbia,  Texas,  July,  4, 
1836,  he  says : 

"  When  I  offered  to  treat  with  this  government,  I  was  convinced  that  it  was  useless 
for  Mexico  to  continue  the  war.  I  have  acquired  exact  information  respecting  the 
country,  which  I  did  not  possess  four  months  ago.  I  have  too  much  zeal  for  the 
interests  of  my  country  to  wish  for  anything  which  is  not  compatible  with  them. 
Being  always  ready  to  sacrifice  myself  for  its  glory  and  advantage,  I  never  would 
have  hesitated  to  subject  myself  to  torments  or  death,  rather  than  consent  to  any  com- 
promise, if  Mexico  could  thereby  obtain  the  slightest  benefit.  /  am  firmly  convinced 
that  it  is  proper  to  terminate  this  question  by  political  negotiation.'" 

During  the  eight  years  past,  and  especially  within  the  last  two,  at 
times,  there  have  been  a  paper  war  and  marauding ;  and,  to  put  an 
end  to  the  irregular  and  occasional  incursions  that  have  sometimes 
happened  during  that  period,  an  armistice  has  been  proposed  by 
Mexico,  which,  being  exceptionable  in  its  terms,  is  reported  never  to 
have  been  ratified  by  Texas.  So  that  the  question  (whether  it  may 
be  aided  by  an  armistice  which  admits  a  temporary  peace, —  and,  in  the 
case  between  Holland  and  Spain,  lasted  twelve  years,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  a  durable  peace, —  or  maybe  embarrassed  by  it,  as  some 
suppose,  by  its  implying  the  existence  of  a  previous  war)  is  probably 
free  from  this  difficulty ;  and  if  Texas  is  taken  by  us  now,  we  take 
with  her  neither  an  existing  war  nor  probably  any  existing  armistice. 

The  documents  communicated  to  us  lately  show  that  the  armistice, 
so  much  talked  of,  has  never  been  ratified  by  the  two  governments ; 
and  it  is  evident  that  no  regular  war  existed,  to  be  suspended  by  an 
armistice. 

The  Texian  ministers,  speaking  of  the  supposed  armistice,  say : 

"  The  negotiations  having  thus  terminated,  and  this  agreement  being  held  to  be 
null  and  void,  there  is  at  present  no  subsisting  arrangement  of  any  character  between 
Mexico  and  Texas." 

Our  own  minister  at  Mexico  entertains  the  same  views : 


KE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  397 

"  Mexico,  Feb.  2,  1844. 
********* 

"lam  informed  that  the  negotiation  with  Texas  for  peace  is  not  only  broken  off, 
but  that  the  armistice  has  also  been  suspended.  You  •will  remember  that,  from  the 
beginning  of  this  matter,  I  expressed  the  opinion  that  nothing  would  come  of  it.  It 
was  only  a  device  on  the  part  of  Santa  Anna  to  relieve  him  from  the  difficulty  in 
which  he  had  involved  himself  by  his  threats  and  promises  of  re-conquering  Texas, 
which  he  knows  perfectly  well  is  impossible.  There  may  be  other  marauding  forays, 
like  that  of  General  Well,  retreating  more  rapidly  than  they  advanced;  but  as  to  any 
regular  and  reasonably  sufficient  force  invading  the  country,  the  thing  is  impossible, 
and  will  not  be  attempted.  They  cannot  raise  money  to  support  such  an  army  two 
months. 

"  My  opinion  is,  notwithstanding  all  their  vaporing  and  gasconade,  that  the  most 
agreeable  thing  to  Santa  Anna  would  be  an  authoritative  interposition  of  our  govern- 
ment to  put  an  end  to  the  war,  as  he  would  then  say  that  we  were  too  strong  for  them 
to  contend  with." 

An  armistice,  when  made  by  governments,  and  not  military  men,  as 
this  was,  acknowledges  the  separate  national  existence  and  rights  of 
each,  and  thus  virtually  surrenders  the  point  in  controversy.  Such 
was  that  with  Holland  and  Spain. 

To  make  any  state  of  things  a  war  for  the  purpose  of  re -conquest,  it 
must  be  with  a  will  and  a  force  adequate  to  the  object,  or  apparently 
so.  It  must  be  something  beside  proclamations,  and  the  occasional 
murder  of  non-combatants,  and  piratical  plundering;  it  must  be  a 
public  force,  and  not,  as  Cowper  says,  words,  or  "  a  duel  in  the  form 
of  a  debate." 

Grotius  (book  1,  chap.  1,  p.  38)  defines  war,  from  Cicero,  to  be 
"  a  dispute  by  force."  And  though  custom  may  call  the  state  or  dis- 
position to  use  force  a  war,  yet  common  sense  seems  to  look  to  the  act 
of  force  as  alone  real  war. 

But  the  entire  cessation  of  hostilities  from  1836  to  1842,  and  the 
occasional  as  well  as  contemptible  incursions  since,  indicate  the  aban- 
donment of  any  war  of  re -conquest,  and  are  not  that  species  of  hostilities 
which,  in  their  character,  keep  up  a  claim  of  right,  or  can  be  recog- 
nized, on  any  principles  of  national  law,  as  precluding  other  nations  to 
consider  Texas,  both  de  jure  and  de  facto,  a  sovereign  State.  Much 
less  are  we  likely,  by  a  union  with  Texas,  to  be  involved  in  actual 
hostilities,  when  none  are  waging, —  when  none  could  probably  avail 
anything  of  good  to  Mexico,  and  when  none  have  occurred  at  all 
adequate  to  re-conquest  for  near  half  a  generation. 

If,  as  the  senator  from  Missouri  correctly  stated  on  the  1st  instant, 
Mexico  is  utterly  unable  to  conquer  Texas  (the  opposite  opinion  from 
that  expressed  by  the  senator  from  Massachusetts), —  if  an  invader 
would,  by  her  own  resources,  be  driven  like  chaif  before  the  whirlwind, 
and  a  defeat  of  him  be  deemed  a  mere  holiday, —  pray  inform  me  what 
kind  of  a  petty,  wretched,  uncertain  war,  do  we  risk  by  uniting  with 
Texas  ?  and  how  little  it  should  stand  in  the  way  of  our  high  duty  to 
take  the  cession  ?  What  kind  of  a  contemptible  war  do  we  assume  or 
risk,  either  in  this  way  or  by  presenting  any  constitutional  aid,  if 
invaded  while  the  ratification  of  the  treaty  is  pending?     Who  believes 


398  RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS. 

any  such  invasion  will  be  attempted,  now  or  hereafter,  when  so  disas- 
trous will  be  the  consequences  to  Mexico,  even  by  Texas  alone  1 

The  danger  in  the  path  of  our  action  is  not  only  uncertain,  remote, 
and  small,  but  it  is  of  a  mere  constructive  war,  that  has  been  prosecuted 
without  just  cause,  and  which  both  France  and  England,  as  well  as 
ourselves,  have  informed  her  ought  not  to  be  prosecuted  longer.  Eng- 
land, since  1840,  has  been  under  obligations,  by  a  treaty  of  mediation 
with  Texas,  to  procure  an  abandonment  of  the  claims  of  Mexico.  Mr. 
Pakenham,  April  19th,  1844,  in  confidential  Doc.  No.  8,  says : 

"It  is  a  •well-known  fact  that  her  (Great  Britain's)  most  zealous  exertions  have 
been  directed  towards  the  completion  of  that  independence,  by  obtaining  its  acknowl- 
edgment at  the  hands  of  the  only  power  by  which  it  was  seriously  disputed." 

But  why  such  zealous  exertions  for  Texas,  if  she  was  not  right  1 
Again,  Lord  Aberdeen  says  : 

"  We  (Great  Britain)  put  ourselves  forward  in  pressing  the  government  of  Mexico 
to  acknowledge  Texas  as  independent."    (Letter  20th  Dec,  1843,  —  ditto  40th  page.) 

Why  press  Mexico  to  abandon  her  cause,  if  it  was  correct  ? 

If  Mexico,  then,  will  not  abandon  any  thought  of  further  hostilities, 
—  if  she  will  not  listen  to  the  advice  of  foreign  powers  to  acknowledge 
Texian  independence, —  if  she  persists  obstinately  in  disturbing  the 
peace  and  commerce  of  the  rest  of  the  world  in  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  and 
its  neighborhood, —  if  she  chooses  to  rely  on  the  logic  of  kings,  the 
ultima  ratio  re  gum,  rather  than  the  judgment  of  the  chief  powers 
of  the  civilized  world, —  it  will  not  be  our  fault,  but  hers,  if  any  fur- 
ther hostilities  ensue.  The  fortune  of  war  must  then  be  ours ;  and 
craven  indeed  would  be  our  spirit  to  flinch  from  it. 

But  if  we  turn  a  moment  to  the  history  of  the  past,  we  shall  find 
that  nations  generally  have  not  made  cessions  in  a  time  of  war  by  the 
party  in  full  possession  a  ground  of  war  upon  the  purchaser;  and 
much  less  have  they  been  accustomed  to  do  it  after  such  intervals  of 
hostility,  such  protracted  feebleness  in  the  contest,  such  numerous  and 
high  remonstrances  against  it  from  the  rest  of  the  world,  as  exist  in 
the  present  case.     I  will  select  only  three  or  four  cases. 

In  1685,  after  several  years  of  revolution  in  Holland  against  Spain, 
and  only  five  years  after  the  declaration  of  independence  by  the  former, 
Queen  Elizabeth,  by  a  treaty,  loaned  money  and  troops  to  aid  her,  and 
took  a  cession  in  mortgage  of  several  towns  and  fortresses  to  indemnify 
her.  This  was  sixty-three  years  before  their  independence  was 
acknowledged  by  Spain ;  and  it  was  five  years  after  that  before  Spain 
chose  to  involve  her  in  the  general  war,  on  this  or  any  other  account. 
(See  2  Davis'  Hist,  of  Holland,  175  and  235.) 

Again,  in  1658,  Dunkirk  was  conquered  from  Spain  by  France  and 
England,  and  given  to  the  latter.  In  1662,  October  17,  it  was  ceded 
by  Charles  II.  to  Louis  XIV.,  by  treaty;  and  by  the  8th  article  it 
was  stipulated  that,  if  the  King  of  Spain,  from  whom  it  was  taken  "  by 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS.  399 

right  of  arms,"  should  try  to  regain  it  in  two  years,  England  was  to 
furnish  "a  considerable  fleet"  to  defend  it;  but  none  after  two  years. 
(1  Col.  of  Treaties,  p.  121.)    And  did  the  aid  ever  become  necessary? 

Again,  in  1712,  Denmark,  in  a  war  with  Sweden,  took  the  Duchy 
of  Bremen  and  Verden  from  the  latter,  who  had  held  it  under  a  treaty 
since  1648,  and  sold  and  ceded  it  to  the  Elector  of  Hanover,  who  was 
then  George  I.  of  England,  and  who  held  it  without  Sweden  ever 
presuming  to  make  it  a  cause  of  war  with  Hanover  or  England.  (2 
vol.  Puffendorfs  Summary,  p.  202,  246,  256-8.) 

Lastly,  and  directly  in  point,  Guatemala  was  acknowledged  inde- 
pendent in  1824,  under  the  name  of  "  United  Provinces  of  Central 
America."  Chiapus,  which  had  before  belonged  to  Guatemala,  chose 
to  act  independent  of  Guatemala,  and,  against  her  consent,  at  length 
offered  to  unite  with  Mexico,  and  was  admitted,  and  remains  there. 
This  was  in  1835.  (See  pp.  113  and  117,  2  Ken.)  So,  in  private 
life,  and  by  the  common  law,  a  party  in  possession  of  land  can  convey 
and  deliver  it  properly,  without  imputations  of  fraud  and  conspiracy, 
as  lavished  here ;  and  outstanding  claims  by  third  persons  must  be 
abandoned,  or  peacefully  prosecuted  against  the  new  occupant  and 
trespasser.  In  Martin,  b.  1,  c.  1,  and  b.  8,  c.  5,  the  true  doctrine  is 
laid  down,  that  a  State  is  free  and  sovereign,  if  it  governs  itself,  and 
acknowledges  no  superior  but  God.  Then  others  may  not  only 
acknowledge  such  a  State  as  sovereign  and  independent,  but  take 
grants  of  territory  from  it,  and  even  aid  it,  if  its  cause  be  just,  and  it 
is  in  possession.  The  opposite  party  will  usually  complain;  and, 
unless  policy  forbid,  will  at  times  seek  to  recover  the  land,  or  retaliate ; 
but  seldom,  if  ever,  in  protracted  troubles  like  this.  If  Texas  had 
injured  us,  and  refused  redress,  since  her  independence  was  recognized 
in  1837,  could  we  not  rightfully  have  made  war  on  her,  and,  if  con- 
quering, hold  her  territory,  if  possible,  as  against  Mexico  and  the  whole 
world  ?  Surely.  And  this  settles  the  whole  question  of  the  de  jure 
right  of  cession  or  transfer ;  for  conquest  is  only  one  mode  of  transfer, 
rightfully,  by  the  law  of  nations.  We  have  obtained  indemnity  from 
her  by  one  treaty  since  1836,  and  established  even  boundaries  with 
her  by  another.  But  how  this  has  been  done  with  her  rightfully,  and 
not  Mexico,  if  Mexico  is  the  de  jure  government,  it  would  be  difficult 
to  explain. 

Regarding  the  territory  of  Texas  as  conquered  by  its  people  from 
Mexico,  which  some  do,  then  their  sovereignty  to  it  is  completed  by 
the  full  assent  of  its  population ;  and  their  cession  is  valid  by  a  like 
assent  of  them,  as  well  as  their  government.     (2  Burlemaque,  p.  309.) 

In  war,  the  title  of  all  property  seized  on  either  side  is  considered  to 
be  in  the  actual  possession ;  and,  if  afterwards  sold  to  a  third  person, 
or  third  power,  the  title  passes,  and  it  passes  beyond  recovery,  if  of 
movables ;  and  if  of  immovables,  cannot  be  regained,  unless  by  con- 
sent, or  unless  the  original  owner  chooses  to  risk  for  it  war  (1  Burle- 
maque, 297),  and  succeeds  in  the  war.     (2  Wheaton,  289.) 


400  RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

Nor  is  it  any  breach  of  treaty  with  Mexico  to  take  such  a  cession, 
in  such  a  case.  It  is  the  right  and  usage  of  nations  to  do  it.  They 
must  deal  with  Texas  as  a  dejure  as  well  as  de  facto  government, — 
as  of  full  age,  and  possessing  in  the  family  of  nations  equal  rights  and 
power  with  other  nations.  The  doctrine  jus  postlimiiiii  does  not 
apply,  unless  the  original  owner  gets  into  possession  (2  Wheaton,  112)  ; 
and  a  "modification  of  the  rule  may  be  required  in  practical  applica- 
tion "  even  then,  if  a  civil  revolution  is  mixed  up.  (Grotius,  b.  3,  ch. 
6,  sec.  4.)  But  there  is  no  breach  of  treaty,  there  being  no  guaranty 
of  territory  in  any  of  our  treaties  with  Mexico,  though  once  our  min- 
isters were  instructed  to  make  such  a  guaranty  to  Spain  of  her  territo- 
ries west  of  the  Mississippi.  Yet  it  is  competent  for  Mexico  to  make 
the  cession  and  union  of  Texas  with  us,  until  her  claims  are  relin- 
quished, a  cause  of  hostilities  towards  us ;  though,  under  all  the  cir- 
cumstances of  the  right  of  the  contest  being  in  Texas,  as  before 
explained,  it  is  not  a  just  cause.  Where  a  revolt  has  occurred,  and  its 
independence  been  acknowledged,  third  powers  may  treat  it,  when  in 
possession  of  separate  sovereignty,  as  independent  in  all  respects ;  and 
if  former  masters  complain,  it  is  without  cause.  So  it  is  competent  to 
aid  such  power  while  in  "  possession  of  independence,"  as  we  must  if 
uniting  with  Texas ;  but  if  the  secession  be  unjust,  the  old  masters 
may  complain,  and  resort  to  force,  "  as  policy  or  anger  may  prompt," 
but  not  if  secession  be  just.  (Martin's  Law  of  Nations,  p.  80,  b.  3, 
ch.  2,  sec.  10.) 

But  though  exposed  in  such  case  to  some  belligerent  hazards,  they 
are  usually  encountered  when  duty  prompts ;  and  much  more  readily 
if  the  hazards,  as  here,  are  remote,  doubtful, —  founded,  as  here,  in 
injustice  on  the  part  of  the  ancient  claimant,  and  prosecuted  in  a  bar- 
barous and  unjustifiable  manner. 

Let  me  not  be  misunderstood.  In  one  aspect  of  the  case,  as  all  the 
territory  of  Texas  is  ceded,  and  her  government  united  with  ours,  we 
may  be  held  jointly  responsible  for  all  that  Texas  is  now  liable  to 
severally. 

I  am  free  to  admit  that,  though  actual  hostilities  do  not  now  exist, 
and  of  course  will  not  now  be  assumed  by  us  if  uniting  with  Texas, 
yet  Mexico  can  obstinately  persist  in  claiming  her  allegiance  forever, 
— may  refuse  to  recognize  her  independence  for  centuries,  and  threaten 
everlasting  war.  But  before  actually  recommencing  hostilities,  she 
will  be  likely  to  look  a  little  to  public  opinion  and  her  true  policy, 
under  all  the  facts  of  the  case,  and  will  probably  come  to  the  conclu- 
sion that  a  war  renewed  after  all  the  circumstances  just  recapitulated 
can  hardly  be  deemed  a  just  war,  or  receive  any  countenance  from  the 
intelligence  and  civilization  of  the  rest  of  the  world.  It  is  certainly 
preferable  not  to  come  in  collision  with  any  nation,  under  any  preten- 
sions, however  ill-founded,  if  they  can  be  overcome  by  reasonable 
remonstrance  or  friendly  solicitation.  But,  if  all  these  have  been 
exhausted  in  vain  by  us  and  the  leading  powers  of  Europe,  to  persuade 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  401 

Mexico  to  recognize  the  independence  of  Texas,  the  safety  of  interna- 
tional intercourse  and  the  claims  of  humanity  will  compel  the  rest  of 
the  world  to  perform  their  duties  to  others,  and  sustain  their  own 
national  rights. 

Under  all  the  circumstances,  then,  we  not  only  possess  rights  to 
secure  our  frontiers  more  effectually  in  both  peace  and  war,  and  pro- 
tect our  institutions  and  commerce  from  all  disturbances,  but  it  is  our 
duty  to  do  it  when  voluntary  and  amicable  opportunities  exist ;  and 
we  should  beside  be  justly  exposed  to  severe  censure,  as  the  leading 
power  on  the  American  continent,  if  we  longer  neglect  to  extend  more 
decisive  influence  in  favor  of  a  weaker  and  wronged  people,  our  neigh- 
bors and  kin ;  and  to  interpose  effectually  to  put  an  end  to  inhuman 
aggressions  upon  them,  and  to  restore  peace,  commerce,  and  civilized 
conduct,  on  the  theatre  of  the  new  world. 

The  rules  of  national  law  are  clear  on  this  point ;  and,  in  the  first 
place,  as  to  the  interposition  for  stopping  a  contest  which  has  been 
conducted  with  inhumanity. 

I  fearlessly  assert,  that  if  the  condition  of  things  which  has  existed 
since  1836  is  to  be  dignified  by  the  name  of  a  public  war  between 
Mexico  and  Texas,  it  has  been  conducted  in  such  a  predatory  and 
uncivilized  manner,  that  if,  by  a  friendly  union  with  Texas,  we  become 
exposed  to  it,  and  it  is  renewed,  we  shall  perform  a  great  public 
Christian  and  international  duty,  by  thus  taking  it  on  ourselves  and 
ending  it. 

Mixed  up  with  this  is  often  the  consideration  that  the  contest  has 
been  carried  on  so  long  as  to  disturb  too  much  the  peace,  commerce, 
and  interests  of  the  rest  of  the  world ;  and,  in  this  way,  tends  not  only 
to  the  gradual  destruction  of  one  or  both  of  the  belligerents,  but  sacri- 
fices the  mutual  rights  of  others  to  free  trade  and  tranquillity,  and 
makes  them  victims  to  foolish  obstinacy  on  the  part  of  the  combatants. 

This  is  unreasonable,  and  may,  by  compacts  between  other  nations, 
or  the  magnanimous  impulses  of  one,  be  ended,  if  practicable. 

Let  us  first  listen  to  what  Chancellor  Kent  says  against  such  mis- 
behavior in  war.  In  1  Kent's  Com.,  90,  he  denounces,  as  contrary  to 
national  law,  the  "making  slaves  of  prisoners."  (Cites  Grotius  for 
this  and  Montesquieu,  as  saying  "  that  the  laws  of  war  gave  no  other 
power  over  a  captive  than  to  keep  him  safely.")  So,  page  91,  plunder 
of  private  property  on  land  is  forbidden  in  war ;  and  especially  you  are 
"  not  to  disturb  the  cultivators  of  the  soil." 

Hear  Mr.  Webster,  also,  on  that  point  (in  Doc.  10,  confidential),  in 
his  letter  to  Thompson,  part  of  which  I  have  before  cited  for  another 
purpose  : 

"  You  will  take  occasion  to  converse  with  the  Mexican  Secretary,  in  a  friendly 
manner,  and  represent  to  him  how  greatly  it  would  contribute  to  the  advantage  as 
well  as  the  honor  of  Mexico  to  abstain  altogether  from  predatory  incursions,  and 
other  similar  modes  of  warfare.  Mexico  has  an  undoubted  right  to  re-subjugate 
Texas,  if  she  can,  so  far  as  other  States  are  concerned,  by  the  common  and  lawful 
means  of  war.     But  other  States  are  interested,  —  and  especially  the  United  States,  a 

34* 


402  RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

near  neighbor  to  both  parties,  are  interested  —  not  only  in  the  restoration  of  peace 
between  them,  but  also  in  the  manner  in  which  the  war  shall  be  conducted,  if  it  shall 
continue.  These  suggestions  may  suffice  for  what  you  are  requested  to  say,  amicably 
and  kindly,  to  the  Mexican  Secretary,  at  present  ;  but  I  may  add,  for  your  informa- 
tion, that  it  is  in  the  contemplation  of  this  government  to  remonstrate  in  a  more  for- 
mal manner  with  Mexico,  at  a  period  not  far  distant,  unless  she  shall  consent  to 
make  peace  with  Texas,  or  shall  show  the  disposition  and  ability  to  prosecute  the  war 
with  respectable  forces." 

Let  me  explain  how  the  remonstrance  in  a  more  formal  manner 
against  the  Turkish  mode  of  waging  war  in  Greece  upon  women  and 
children,  farmers  and  vineyards,  in  1827  (427),  was  conducted  by 
the  great  European  powers.  It  was  by  laying  the  English,  French, 
and  Russian  fleets  alongside  of  the  semi-barbarians,  from  whose  decks 
the  ravaging  troops  had  been  disgorged,  and  blowing  up  and  otherwise 
destroying  four  sail-of-the-line,  fifteen  frigates,  fifteen  corvettes,  nine 
brigs,  three  fire-ships,  and  numerous  transports,  being  the  whole  Otto- 
man fleet  of  near  one  hundred  vessels,  and  a  loss  of  human  life  unpre- 
cedented in  maritime  contests.     (2  Blount,  428.) 

Hear  Mr.  Webster  again  on  the  right  for  us  to  interfere : 

"Indeed,  although  the  right  or  the  safety  of  none  of  their  own  citizens  was  con- 
cerned, yet  if,  in  a  war  waged  between  two  neighboring  states,  the  killing,  enslaving, 
or  cruelly  treating  of  persons,  should  be  indulged,  the  United  States  would  feel  it  to 
be  their  duty,  as  well  as  their  right,  to  remonstrate  and  to  interfere  against  such  a 
departure  from  the  principles  of  humanity  and  civilization.  These  principles  are 
common  principles,  essential  alike  to  the  welfare  of  all  nations  ;  and  in  the  preserva- 
tion of  which  all  nations  have,  therefore,  rights  and  interests.  But  their  duty  to 
interfere  becomes  imperative  in  cases  affecting  their  own  citizens. 

"It  is  therefore  that  the  government  of  the  United  States  protests  against  the 
hardships  and  cruelties  to  which  the  Santa  Fe  prisoners  have  been  subjected.  It 
protests  against  this  treatment  in  the  name  of  humanity,  and  the  law  of  nations  ;  in 
the  name  of  all  Christian  States  ;  in  the  name  of  civilization,  and  the  spirit  of  the 
age  ;  in  the  name  of  all  republics  ;  in  the  name  of  Liberty  herself,  enfeebled  and 
dishonored  by  all  cruelty  and  all  excess  ;  in  the  name  and  for  the  honor  of  this  whole 
hemisphere,  it  protests  emphatically  and  earnestly  against  practices  belonging  only 
to  barbarous  people,  in  barbarous  times. 

"  Every  nation,  on  being  received,  at  her  own  request,  into  the  circle  of  civilized 
governments,  must  understand  that  she  not  only  attains  rights  of  sovereignty,  and 
the  dignity  of  national  character,  but  that  she  binds  herself  also  to  the  strict  and 
faithful  observance  of  all  those  principles,  laws  and  usages,  which  have ^  obtained 
currency  among  civilized  states,  and  which  have  for  their  object  the  mitigation  of  the 
miseries  of  war."     (Webster,  April  5,  1842.) 

"  No  community  can  be  allowed  to  enjoy  the  benefit  of  national  character  in  mod- 
ern times,  without  submitting  to  all  the  duties  which  that  character  imposes.  A 
Christian  people  who  exercise  sovereign  power,  who  make  treaties,  maintain  diplo- 
matic relations  with  other  States,  and  who  should  yet  refuse  to  conduct  its  military 
operations  according  to  the  usages  universally  observed  by  such  States,  would  present 
a  character  singularly  inconsistent  and  anomalous."     (Webster,  April  5, 1842.) 

Let  us  stop,  then,  if  possible,  by  this  alliance  with  Texas,  the  fero- 
cious and  cruel  course  of  Mexico ;  her  barbarous  warfare  on  women 
and  children ;  the  letting  loose  of  Indian  butchery  and  conflagration ; 
the  assaults  by  a  convict  banditti  for  plunder ;  the  shooting,  in  cold 
blood,  of  prisoners  of  war,  or  immuring  them  in  dungeons  and  chains. 
I  would  remember  that  Lord  Chatham  appealed  to  the  very  tapestry 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS.  403 

on  the  walls  of  Parliament  to  frown  on  them  for  an  indulgence  in  any- 
such  barbarous  practices,  as  the  portrait  of  the  father  of  his  country, 
on  that  wall,  would  now  frown  on  us,  if  we  justified  such  practices. 

Belligerents  have  no  right  to  ask  from  neutrals  respect  to  belliger- 
ent conduct,  unless  it  be  of  a  Christian  character,  and  such  as  is  toler- 
ated by  the  laws  of  civilized  nations.  But,  on  the  contrary,  they  are 
justified  in  an  armed  neutrality,  or  in  leagues,  or  alliances,  to  put  an 
end  to  such  inhumanities,  as  well  as  to  their  longer  disturbance  of  the 
sympathies,  commerce  and  peace,  of  other  nations. 

But  enough  as  to  the  principles  applicable  to  such  a  case,  which 
justify  us  in  risking  even  war,  if  necessary,  to  end  these  outrages.  But 
I  regret  that  one  senator  (Mr.  Choate)  has  denied  the  existence  of 
such  atrocities  on  the  part  of  Mexico,  and  has  treated  her  as  a  most 
republican  and  "unoffending"  power. * 

Indeed,  sir,  Mexico  has  been  eulogized  as  a  nation  that  has  carried 
on  a  constant  and  humane  war  with  Texas,  and,  at  the  same  time, 
with  much  skill  and  success.  What,  sir !  The  success  of  eight  mil- 
lions of  people  against  one-third  of  a  million ;  and,  after  seven  years, 
have  not  regained  a  single  acre  of  land,  but  lost  armies  and  chiefs  by 
capture,  and  implored  the  clemency  and  release  of  them  from  the  hand- 
ful of  lion  hearts,  and  eagle  eyes,  and  brave  arms,  which,  nerved  by 
freedom,  have  stood  up  valiantly  against  oppression  till  the  present 
moment ! 

But  let  us  see  how  the  facts  accord  with  that  senator's  views.  The 
evidence  as  to  the  moral  and  civilized  conduct  of  Mexican  warfare,  as 
described  by  Mr.  Van  Zandt  officially,  and  whose  high  and  recognized 
station  here  entitles  him  to  full  credence,  is  this : 

"  Mexico  has  been  depredating  upon  the  property  of  our  exposed  and  defenceless 
frontier;  murdering  the  inhabitants  in  cold  blood,  or  forcing  them  away  into  a  loath- 
some and  too  often  fatal  captivity  ;  inciting  the  numerous  tribes  of  hostile  Indians, 
who  reside  along  our  northern  frontier,  to  plunder  our  exposed  settlements  ;  stimu- 
lating them  to  the  most  cruel  and  barbarous  massacres  and  inhuman  butcheries  even 
of  our  defenceless  women  and  children,  and  to  commit  every  excess  of  savage  war- 
fare."    (Con.  Doc,  pp.  12,  15.     Van  Zandt  to  Upshur.) 

Listen,  next,  on  the  facts,  to  Mr.  "Webster.  In  a  letter  to  Mr. 
Thompson,  he  speaks  of  (31  January,  1843)  " predatory  incursions 

*In  the  debate,  it  was  averred  that  the  rights  of  conscience  and  religion  had  never 
been  invaded  by  Mexico,  and  were  similar  under  both  governments,  and  protected  in 
one  as  well  as  the  other.  With  a  view  to  correct  this,  and  to  show  that  Mexico,  if 
unoffending,  is  not  exactly  the  bulwark  of  our  religion  (at  least  of  the  Protestant 
religion  of  the  east) ,  I  add  an  extract  from  the  constitution  of  each  on  this  subject : 

"  No  preference  shall  be  given  by  law  to  any  religious  denomination,  or  mode  of 
worship,  over  another;  but  every  person  shall  be  permitted  to  worship  God  according 
to  the  dictates  of  his  own  conscience."  (Texian  constitution,  doc.  415,  p.  16,  H.  of 
Rep.,  June  24th,  1836.) 

"  The  religion  of  the  Mexican  nation  is,  and  will  be  perpetually,  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic Apostolic.  The  nation  will  protect  it  by  wise  and  just  laws,  and  prohibit  the 
exercise  of  any  other  whatever."  (Mexican  constitution,  2  Kennedy's  History,  p. 
422.) 


404  RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

in  which  the  proclamation  and  promises  of  the  Mexican  commander  are 
flagrantly  violated,  non-combatants  seized  and  detained  as  prison- 
ers of  war,  and  private  property  used  and  destroyed."  Yet  the 
senator  from  Massachusetts  (Mr.  Choate)  doubts  all  this,  has  no 
sympathy  nor  complaint  for  this,  but  eulogizes  Mexico  as  humane, 
' ' unoffending,"  and  successful, — yes,  humane!  Though,  when  Mr. 
Thompson  remonstrated  with  Mexico  for  predatory  forays,  &c,  the 
minister  virtually  confessed  the  whole,  by  vindicating  it,  in  saying 
"  that  prisoners  taken  were  not  entitled  to  any  of  the  privileges  of 
prisoners  of  war,  but  that  they  were  rebels,  and  would  be  so  treated," 
&c.     (10  p.  Doc.  Confidential,  March  14,  1843.) 

Hear  Mr.  Webster  further  as  to  the  facts  about  some  other  prison- 
ers: 

"  The  privations  and  indignities  to  which  they  were  subjected,  during  their  march 
of  two  thousand  miles  to  the  city  of  Mexico,  at  the  most  inclement  season  of  the  year, 
were  horrible  ;  and,  if  they  were  not  well  authenticated,  it  would  have  been  incredi- 
ble that  they  should  have  been  inflicted  in  this  age,  and  in  a  country  calling  itself 
Christian  and  civilized.  During  many  days  they  had  no  food,  and  on  others  only- 
two  ears  of  corn  were  distributed  to  each  man.  To  sustain  life,  therefore,  they  were 
compelled  to  sell,  on  their  way,  the  few  remnants  of  clothing  which  their  captors  had 
left  them  ;  but,  by  seeking  to  appease  their  hunger,  they  increased  the  misery  which 
they  already  endured  from  exposure  to  the  cold.  Most  dreadful  of  all,  however,  sev- 
eral of  them,  disabled  by  sickness  and  suffering  from  keeping  up  with  the  others, 
were  deliberately  shot,  without  any  provocation.  Those  who  survived  to  their  jour- 
ney's end  were  many  of  them  afflicted  with  loathsome  disease  ;  and  those  whose 
health  was  not  broken  down  have  been  treated,  not  as  the  public  law  requires,  but  in 
a  manner  harsh  and  vindictive,  and  with  a  degree  of  severity  equal,  at  least,  to  that 
usually  inflicted  by  the  municipal  codes  of  the  most  civilized  and  Christian  States 
upon  the  basest  felons.  Indeed,  they  appear  to  have  been  ranked  with  these,  being 
thrust  into  the  same  dungeon  with  Mexican  malefactors,  chained  to  them  in  pairs, 
and  when  allowed  to  see  the  light  and  breathe  the  air  of  heaven,  required,  as  a  com- 
pensation therefor,  to  labor,  beneath  the  lash  of  a  taskmaster,  upon  roads  and  public 
works  of  that  country." 

Though  the  senator  from  Massachusetts  may  discredit  all  the  enor- 
mities so  feelingly  described  by  his  friend,  the  late  Secretary  of  State, 
and  may  think  the  hostilities  to  be  now  humane  and  successful,  and 
Texas,  if  not  protected  or  ceded  to  us,  likely,  ere  long,  to  be  re-con- 
quered by  Mexico,  can  he,  on  reflection,  think  of  that  event  with  so 
much  apparent  and  unmingled  satisfaction  ?  What,  sir !  Our  brethren 
and  children,  decoyed  there  by  new  and  liberal  colonization  laws  of 
Mexico,  and  then  stripped  of  their  privileges,  their  constitution  vio- 
lated, and  their  rights  of  conscience  invaded,  and  their  Saxon  blood 
humiliated,  and  enslaved  to  Moors,  Indians,  and  mongrels !  When 
prisoners  of  war  and  non-combatants,  are  they  to  be  plundered,  shot, 
or  imprisoned  in  dungeons  like  felons,  and  compelled  to  labor  like 
slaves  f  Is  all  his  sympathy  and  patriotism  to  tell  them,  if  disliking 
that,  they  may  submit  to  the  holy-alliance  claims  of  Mexico,  or  take 
refuge  under  the  power  of  England  —  re-colonized  to  the  power  their 
fathers  defied,  and  re-subjected  to  a  monarchy  and  established  church  1 
I  do  not  profess  to  use  his  words,  but  to  show  the  tendency  of  his 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS.  405 

argument.  Will  the  senator  from  Missouri  concur  with  him  in  this 
view  1  No,  sir,—  no !  In  another  part  of  his  speech,  the  senator 
from  Massachusetts  admits  that  much  blood  is  yet  to  be  spilt  there. 
However  near  the  re-conquest  appears  to  him,  under  so  vigorous  a 
war  of  eight  years,  by  eight  millions  of  people  against  two  or  three 
hundred  thousand, —  and  if  much  more  is  to  be  so  spilt, — why  ought 
not  all  of  us  to  seek,  by  the  ratification  of  this  treaty,  to  prevent  the 
calamity  and  the  unchristian  stain  of  it  on  civilization,  as  well  as  save 
our  kin  from  the  ignoble  bondage,  as  I  regard  their  re-subjugation, 
but  the  great  blessings,  as  he  seems  to  consider  them,  of  an  early 
re-conquest  by  the  free,  enlightened,  and  unoffending  Mexicans  ? 

But  there  are  other  views  of  the  existing  relations  between  Mexico 
and  Texas,  which  render  the  re-annexation  not  only  free  from  exposure 
to  any  actual  or  just  war,  but  an  act  of  high  national  duty  for  relief 
to  a  weak  and  oppressed  neighbor.  Thus  it  is  repeatedly  laid  down, 
by  writers  on  national  law,  that  nations  may  properly  assist  each  other 
when  their  rights  are  violated,  whether,  in  consequence  of  such  viola- 
tion, they  change  the  old  rulers  or  old  government,  or  divide  and 
declare  a  part  independent.  (Kent,  p.  24 ;  Vattel,  B.  2,  ch.  4,  sec. 
56.)  Vattel  hence  approves  "the  case  of  the  Prince  of  Orange  as  a 
justifiable  interference"  in  the  affairs  of  England;  and  Kent  says, 
"The  assistance  that  England  gave  to  the  United  Netherlands,  and 
the  assistance  that  France  gave  to  this  country  during  the  war  of  the 
Revolution,  were  justifiable  acts,  founded  in  wisdom  and  policy." 
And  Spain  herself,  once,  through  her  governor  in  Florida,  claimed 
from  us  the  enforcement  of  this  principle. 

Governor  Folch  (December  2,  1810,  3  State  Papers,  396)  asks 
our  aid  to  expel  insurgents,  as  "the  United  States,  who  profess  the 
exercise  of  equity,  cannot  exempt  themselves  from  taking  part  with 
the  party  unjustly  oppressed"  In  national,  as  well  as  personal 
conflicts,  the  duty  of  others  to  interpose  and  protect  the  weak  and 
oppressed,  is  a  principle  of  human  nature.  (1  Martin's  Law  of  Na- 
tions, p.  80.)  It  is  instinct, —  it  is  justified  by  reason;  and  sympa- 
thy, carried  into  action  in  such  cases,  tends  to  ennoble  our  common 
origin  and  destination;  and,  if  the  case  is  one  even  of  doubtful  charac- 
ter, humanity  turns  the  scales  in  favor  of  the  weak. 

The  relief  must,  of  course,  be  rendered  against  the  party  in  the 
wrong, —  as  we  have  already  shown  Mexico  to  be,  not  only  on  the 
American  principles  of  self-government,  but  on  those  of  a  just  resist- 
ance to  her  arbitrary  outrages,  and  the  uncivilized  manner  of  her  past 
hostilities,  and  the  opinion  of  most  of  Christendom  against  her  further 
efforts  to  conquer  Texas.  The  former  has  been  aggressive  —  the  lat- 
ter only  defensive.  The  former  feels  power  and  forgets  right,  while 
the  latter  has  never  asked  either  authority,  privileges,  or  treatment, 
but  such  as  our  fathers  before  them  fought  and  bled  to  establish.  It 
is  a  prominent  object,  in  many  treaties,  to  consult,  not  only  the  "  com- 
mon tranquillity  of  both  nations,"  as  an  object  (1  Col.  of  Treaties,  p. 


406  RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

122),  but  the  rights  of  humanity  and  civilization  among  the  rest  of 
the  world.  I  am  no  alarmist,  nor  shall  I  contribute  to  any  panic 
debate ;  but,  in  my  opinion,  it  is  always  the  right,  and  at  times  the 
duty,  of  every  nation  to  interpose,  not  only  to  urge  the  cessation  from 
an  unjust  war  like  that  of  Mexico,  but,  if  need  be.  to  form  treaties,  and 
supply  troops  and  means,  for  its  suppression.  I  would  dissuade  from 
interference  like  that  of  the  Holy  Alliance,  to  prevent  a  people  from 
exercising  the  power  of  self-government.  I  would  justify  no  Copen- 
hagen seizures  of  the  vessels  of  an  unoifending  neutral.  Nor  would 
I  wander  over  the  world  to  distant  nations,  to  redress  grievances  con- 
cerning which  our  knowledge  was  limited,  and  with  which  neither  our 
interests  nor  tranquillity  were  much  connected.  This  would,  in  some 
cases,  as  it  has  with  England,  border  on  political  quixotism.  But  on 
my  own  continent, —  on  my  own  frontier, —  as  to  a  people  of  my  own 
stock  and  faith,  and  a  territory  once  and  for  a  whole  generation  my 
own, —  I  would  not  hesitate  to  form  a  peaceful  alliance,  and,  if  need 
be,  to  exercise  every  national  influence  for  protection  to  the  weak  and 
oppressed. 

Let  me  entreat  senators  to  recollect,  for  a  moment,  how  often  this  has 
been  done,  even  by  crowned  heads,  whose  tendency  has  been  more  for 
war  than  republics,  and  in  ages  less  civilized  even  than  this ;  and  by,  as 
well  as  against,  some  powers  who,  in  the  very  treaties,  were  so  near 
ruder  periods  as,  among  other  titles,  to  retain  that  of  "King  of  the 
Goths  and  Vandals." 

Thus,  as  early  as  1585  and  1591,  are  such  treaties  to  be  found  in 
modern  times.  (1  Chalmers'  Treaties,  and  3  Collection  of  Treaties.) 
In  1659,  February  3,  a  treaty  was  made  between  Richard  Cromwell 
and  Louis  XIV.  to  mediate  between  Sweden  and  Denmark,  and 
if  these  powers  would  not  make  peace,  to  help  Sweden  ;  and  if  France 
or  England  was,  in  consequence  of  it,  attacked,  they  engaged  to  make 
their  defence  a  common  cause.  (3  Col.  of  Treaties.)  Another,  of 
similar  tenor,  "'for  obliging  the  northern  kings  to  make  peace,"  was 
entered  into  May  21,  1659,  by  France,  England,  and  the  United 
Provinces.  They  were  to  use  their  fleets,  if  necessary,  and  to  try, 
through  their  ambassador  at  Denmark  and  Sweden,  to  secure  their 
commerce  in  the  Baltic,  free  and  undamaged,  (p.  191.)  Another,  on 
the  24th  of  July,  1659,  between  England  and  the  United  Provinces, 
was  "for  inducing  Sweden  and  Denmark  to  make  peace,"  and  which- 
ever power  did  not  consent  to  it  in  a  fortnight  was  to  be  induced 
by  using  their  fleets  against  her  (p.  197)  ;  and  another  still  was  made 
August  16th,  of  the  same  year,  between  some  of  these  powers,  "for 
procuring  a  peace  "  between  the  others,  by  the  employment  of  their 
navies  in  concert,  if  necessary. 

Elizabeth,  by  assistance  to  the  Netherlands  in  various  ways,  helped 
to  secure  the  triumph  of  the  Protestant  religion,  and  to  build  up  the 
naval  power  of  England,  so  as  to  triumph  over  Philip's  invincible 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  407 

armada.  She  made  a  treaty  of  alliance  with  them  near  forty  years 
before  Spain  acknowledged  their  independence.   (1  Chalmers,  p.  123.) 

Again,  in  1603,  her  successor,  James  I.,  and  Henry  IV.  of  France, 
entered  into  a  compact  to  mediate  with  Spain  for  the  recognition  of 
the  independence  of  Holland ;  and  in  the  event  that  the  parties  could 
not  be  reconciled  on  just  terms,  they  made  the  important  stipulation  to 
aid  the  side  least  stubborn,  and  aid  each  other,  if  assailed  by  Spain. 
(1  Col.  of  Treaties,  128  and  9.) 

In  1668  (1  Col.  of  Treaties,  136),  a  triple  alliance  was  made 
between  Charles  II.  of  England,  and  Charles  II.  of  Sweden,  and 
the  Netherlands.  They  professed  to  feel  much  grief  at  the  calam- 
ities of  the  war  which  had  involved  most  of  Christendom ;  and  pro- 
vided that,  if  Spain  would  not  accede  to  what  they  thought  reason- 
able terms,  and  end  those  calamities,  they  would  take  urnore  efficacious 
measures  P  (p.  141.)  If  England  or  the  Netherlands  were  attacked, 
the  number  of  ships  and  troops  to  be  mutually  furnished  was  arranged, 
and  the  King  of  Sweden,  on  certain  subsidies,  was  to  assist ;  and  if 
France  proved  unreasonable  and  stubborn,  he  was  to  "  side  with  Spain, 
and  make  war  against  France."   (p.  145.) 

Can  any  of  us  forget,  also,  without  more  details  as  to  earlier  ages, 
the  memorable  alliance  by  France  to  aid  us  in  17T8,  when  weak  and 
oppressed,  and  which,  as  before  seen,  the  soundest  writers  on  national 
law  have  justified  ? 

In  1825  (September  20th),  Mexico  and  Colombia  made  a  similar 
treaty  for  mutual  defence  and  independence,  against  Spain.  (26  and 
29  Niles'  Reg.,  p.  356.) 

And  the  celebrated  Congress  of  Panama  was  projected  for  a  like 
purpose,  among  others.  Indeed,  by  the  last  arrivals,  the  British 
writers  in  politics  are,  on  this  same  principle,  excusing  the  recent 
interference  of  England  in  favor  of  the  people  of  Scinde,  and  against 
its  princes.  Speaking  of  the  latter,  the  Foreign  Quarterly  Review 
for  January,  1844,  says:  "They  were,  in  reality,  tyrants;  and,  in 
delivering  the  inhabitants  of  Scinde  from  their  yoke,  we  were  per- 
forming good  service  to  humanity,"  &c. 

No  more  signal  instances  exist  in  modern  times  of  this  interference 
of  other  powers  to  assist  the  oppressed  and  terminate  protracted  hos- 
tilities,—  injurious  to  the  common  interest  of  the  world, —  than  those 
memorable  ones  as  to  suffering  Greece  in  1827,  as  to  Belgium  in 
1831,  and  Turkey  in  the  Syrian  war  by  Ali  Pacha  in  1832. 

Though  some  of  the  Holy  Alliance  were  engaged  in  these  humane 
enterprises,  yet  others  united  with  them ;  and  the  object  of  the  whole, 
so  far  from  being  similar  to  that  of  the  Holy  Alliance,  and  hostile  to 
changes  of  government  by  the  people,  was,  in  the  case  of  Greece  and 
Belgium,  for  protection  under  those  changes,  and  to  end  a  struggle 
which  might  be  protracted  and  useless  against  them,  as  well  as  dan- 
gerous to  the  general  peace  of  Europe. 

The  former  case  was  deemed  one  of  so  justifiable  an  interference 


408  RE-ANXEXATION   OP   TEXAS. 

here,  as  well  as  abroad,  that 
said,  by  one  of  our  whig  annalists,  to  have  "  hailed  the  first  news  of 
the  victory  of  Navarino,  throughout  civilized  America  and  Europe." 
And  the  distinct  object  then  for  the  movements  of  the  allied  powers, 
as  shadowed  forth  in  their  treaty  of  July  6,  1827,  was  to  restore 
peace  to  Europe ;  and,  though  the  Greeks  were  considered  by  them  to 
be  in  a  state  of  revolt  against  their  lawful  sovereign,  yet  they  were 
desirous  to  protect  them  from  destruction  and  the  ravages  of  a  bar- 
barous system  of  warfare.   (3  Blount's  Reg.,  228  and  9 ;   6  do.,  158.) 

In  the  case  of  Belgium,  the  five  powers,  England,  France,  Austria, 
Russia,  and  Prussia,  agreed  to  a  protocol,  on  the  4th  of  November, 
1830,  by  which  they  required  a  cessation  of  hostilities  on  both  sides, 
and  a  virtual  recognition  of  the  independence  of  Belgium.  This  was 
done,  though  the  revolt  had  existed  scarcely  a  single  year. 

-But  the  peace  of  much  of  the  world  was  likely  to  be  disturbed,  and 
its  industry  and  commerce  most  injuriously  deranged ;  and  hence  they 
felt  justified  to  interfere,  and  did  interfere,  even  to  aid  the  revolters. 
Both  England  and  France  despatched  their  fleets  to  succor  the  weaker 
power ;  and  as  a  check  to  the  obstinacy  of  Holland,  in  still  persevering 
to  lay  waste  villages  and  burn  farm-houses,  they  demolished  the  citadel  of 
Antwerp,  after  a  bombardment  one  of  the  most  remarkable  in  history. 

The  other  case  was  equally  striking,  in  some  respects,  having  been 
an  interference  to  protect  the  Mahometan.  Yes:  the  slaveholding 
Turk  against  revolting  subjects,  many  of  whom,  in  Syria  and  Egypt, 
were  Christians. 

England,  Russia,  and  France  (all  boasted  Christian  powers,  and  so 
ardently  enlisted  in  favor  of  abolition),  united  and  mediated,  not  by 
words  only,  but  Russia  by  the  bayonet  and  cannon,  to  shield  the  infi- 
del slaveholder  from  the  destruction,  and  restore  peace  in  that  quarter 
to  Asia  and  Africa,  as  well  as  Europe.  They  looked  to  the  rights  of 
commerce  and  the  tranquillity  of  Christendom,  and  the  great  interests 
of  peace,  rather  than  to  creeds  of  belief  or  domestic  institutions. 

So,  again,  in  the  case  of  the  revolting  Greeks ;  they  united  to  aid 
even  republicans  and  rebels,  under  certain  conditions. 

After  all  this,  shall  we,  the  leading  power  on  the  continent,  see  our 
Christian  as  well  as  republican  brethren  in  Texas  harassed  longer 
by  barbarous  hostilities.;  and,  in  a  just  cause,  not  sustain  those  who 
have  so  long  and  valiantly  sustained  themselves,  when  monarchies 
abroad  do  it,  even  for  Mussulmans,  rebels,  and  democrats  ?  Shall  they 
do  it  for  these  more  distant,  and  we  not  for  our  nearest  neighbor  and 
kin  ?  Shall  they,  whose  trade  has  been  fighting,  interfere  efficiently 
for  peace  in  aid  of  a  just  struggle,  and  we  who  profess  peace,  and  to 
be  the  disciples  of  the  Prince  of  Peace,  not  lift  a  finger  to  restore  it  ? 
Have  we  lost  our  sympathies,  our  humanity,  our  religion,  and  nei- 
ther incline  nor  dare  to  do  our  duty,  from  fear  of  envious  censure  ? 

How  much  did  considerations  like  some  of  these  rally  all  Europe 
to  band  together  in  driving  Napoleon  to  Elba  and  St.  Helena,  and 


KE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  409 

thus  restore  peace,  and  order,  and  prosperity,  to  the  desolated  cities 
and  fields  of  most  of  Christendom  !  These  are  not  war  measures,  but 
peace  measures.  Nations,  like  individuals,  are  often  to  be  blessed  if 
peacemakers  ;  and  that  not  only  by  the  use  of  arguments  and  entrea- 
ties, but  force,  if  required.  Both  should  thus  interpose,  if  death,  or 
ruin,  or  serious  injury,  is  likely  to  happen  to  others,  as  well  as  them- 
selves, by  a  continuance  of  hostilities,  as  the  rights  of  peace  are  para- 
mount to  those  of  war,  and  such  interposition  is  the  more  quickly  to 
restore  commerce  and  public  tranquillity.  This  suppression  of  further 
conflicts  is  proper  between  parties  who  either  do  not  use  proper  means 
for  ending  them  seasonably,  or  who  outrage  the  laws  of  civilization  in 
their  mode  of  warfare.  The  object  of  such  interference  is  speedier  and 
surer  repose  to  the  world.  It  deserves  encouragement  from  the  friends 
of  peace  and  sound  morals,  as  well  as  of  improving  industry  and  free 
trade.  It  is  philanthropy,  rather  than  selfish  aggrandizement;  and 
merits  applause,  rather  than  the  denunciations  witnessed  on  this  occa- 
sion against  those  who  are  anxious,  by  the  ratification  of  this  treaty, 
to  stop  the  further  effusion  of  human  blood,  the  waste  of  money,  and 
obstructions  to  agriculture  and  commerce  too  long  growing  out  of  the 
past  ruinous  relations  between  Mexico  and  Texas. 

Finally,  let  it  not  be  forgotten  that  it  is  our  duty  to  take  this  peace- 
ful and  voluntary  cession,  even  if  a  risk  of  war  ensues,  provided  that 
we  ourselves  are  thereby  likely  to  escape  from  serious  injury  through 
foreign  influences.  Much  more  can  those  vindicate  it  who  believe  it 
necessary  to  actual  self-preservation,  or  the  security  of  the  institutions, 
property,  and  commerce,  of  any  portion  of  that  great  republic,  one  and 
indivisible,  whose  " domestic  tranquillity"  and  welfare  the  constitu- 
tion itself  was  made  in  part  to  guarantee. 

Thus,  while  France  subdues  Algiers  or  seizes  on  islands  in  the 
Pacific,  and  while  England  invades  China  and  India  and  Africa,  we 
look  on  without  intermeddling,  except  by  uniting  in  that  public  opin- 
ion and  public  judgment  of  the  rest  of  the  civilized  world,  which  finds 
so  much  to  condemn  in  some  of  these  aggrandizing  and  violent  meas- 
ures. But  let  these  foreign  powers,  in  their  restless  ambition,  approach 
Cuba  on  the  south,  or  Texas  on  the  west,  and  our  own  hearths  and 
altars  become  endangered ;  and  the  pervading  instinct  of  self-preser- 
vation, no  less  than  interest,  will,  at  times,  require  us  to  act.  In  such 
case,  if  need  be,  we  must  take  more  efficacious  measures  than  to  talk. 
We  must  even  arm,  rather  than  have  powder  magazines  of  all  kinds 
placed  around  our  frontiers,  and  the  safety  of  property,  revenue,  and 
all  the  commerce  of  the  mighty  west,  jeoparded.  The  precautions 
taken  and  the  resistance  made  on  our  part,  in  such  a  case,  cannot 
justly  be  called  intermeddling  in  the  internal  conflicts  of  parties  in 
another  government.  Nor  is  it  a  struggle,  like  many  in  centuries 
past,  to  preserve  the  old  balance  of  power,  and  check  the  undue  enlarge- 
ment of  a  neighbor,  which  remotely,  and  in  time,  might  prove  injuri- 
ous ;  but  it  is  to  repel  danger  to  ourselves,  quite  certain,  if  not  imme- 
o5 


410  KE- ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

diate  ;  and  that  from  a  quarter  already  hemming  us  in  and  round  at 
every  point  of  the  compass.  We  can,  in  such  cases,  on  sound  princi- 
ples of  national  law,  not  only  take  precautions  to  prevent  the  catas- 
trophe, as  is  now  proposed,  for  that  and  other  reasons,  by  a  peaceful 
and  voluntary  purchase  of  the  territory,  but  can,  if  we  please,  lawfully 
interpose  and  aid  the  party  which  is  just  in  its  efforts  for  self-govern- 
ment, by  making  with  it  alliances,  or  a  union  of  territory,  institutions, 
and  exertions. 

Hence,  in  1  Kent's  Commentaries,  p.  22,  while  he  justly  speaks 
against  the  interference  of  one  nation  to  change  the  government  of 
another,  at  the  same  time  he  says,  " Every  nation  has  an  undoubted 
right  to  provide  for  its  own  safety,  and  to  take  due  'precaution 
against  distant  as  well  as  impending  danger." 

A  memorable  case  occurred  in  1810,  showing  under  what  degree  of 
danger  and  apprehension  so  careful  a  man  as  Mr.  Madison  felt  justified 
to  seize  on  a  neighboring  territory  in  possession  of  Spain,  and  without 
an  act  of  Congress. 

In  the  National  Intelligencer,  December  28,  1810,  a  letter  from 
New  Orleans  speaks  to  this  effect  of  the  terrtiory  east  from  New 
Orleans  to  the  Perdido  : 

"  The  country,  at  least  as  far  as  the  Perdido,  ought  to  he  taken  possession  of  hy 
the  United  States ;  and  if  there  should  be  the  most  distant  probability  of  East  Florida 
falling  into  the  hands  of  any  European  power  whatever,  we  should,  without  hesitation, 
fix  our  standards  at  St.  Augustine  and  Pensacola.  The  province,  of  itself,  is  of  little 
value,  but  it  is  one  of  the  keys  to  the  Mississippi.  Power  placed  there  will  control 
the  commerce  of  the  western  world." 

And  in  the  presidential  message  of  December,  1810,  Mr.  Madison 
announces  his  movements  to  take  possession  to  the  river  Perdido ;  as 
there  was  an  unadjusted  claim,  and  a  revolution,  and  we  could  hold 
till  an  arrangement  was  made  with  Spain. 

Spain  had  been  left  in  possession  till  the  claim  to  it  by  us  was  set- 
tled by  negotiation ;  but  her  power  had  been  resisted  by  insurgents, 
and  subverted ;  and  Madison  ordered  out  troops  and  took  possession 
of  it,  without  waiting  for  any  new  law  by  Congress,  because  a  situa- 
tion was  " produced  exposing  the  country  to  ulterior  events  which 
might  essentially  affect  the  rights  and  welfare  of  the  Union." 

If  force  was  opposed  to  us,  the  United  States  troops  were  instructed 
to  repel  it,  except  from  any  place  still  in  Spanish  occupation.  (Int. 
December  5,  1810.) 

In  his  message  he  says  Congress  will  make  u whatever  provision 
may  be  due  to  the  essential  rights  and  equitable  interests  of  the 
people  thus  brought  into  the  bosom  of  the  American  family." 

He  thought  a  crisis  had  arrived  "  endangering  the  tranquillity 
and  security  of  our  adjoining  territories"  &c.  (See  his  procla- 
mation.) 

In  3  State  Papers,  p.  394-9,  is  Mr.  Madison's  message  at  length, 
and  the  letters  as  to  that  part  of  West  Florida. 


EE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  411 

From  the  whole  it  appears  that  by  force  we  occupied  east  to  Per- 
dido,  not  because  it  was  claimed  by  us,  but  because  the  Spanish 
authority  had  been  ''subverted  by  a  revolutionary  proceeding,  and 
the  contingency  of  the  country  being  thrown  into  foreign  hands  had 
forced  itself  into  view." 

A  few  of  Mr.  Clay's  remarks  on  that  occasion  were  so  intrepid  in 
spirit,  and  showed  so  well  the  dauntless  energy  of  him  and  his  then 
republican  friends  towards  all  opposition,  whether  from  abroad  or  at 
home,  that  they  deserve  special  remembrance.  It  was  such  conduct 
then,  and  in  1811,  1818,  and  1820,  on  kindred  topics,  that  paved  the 
path  on  which  he  has  since  walked  to  such  wide  fame  : 

"  I  have  no  hesitation  in  saying,  that  if  a  parent  country  -will  not  or  cannot  main- 
tain its  authority  in  a  colony  adjacent  to  us,  and  there  exists  in  it  a  state  of  misrule 
and  disorder  menacing  our  peace,  —  and  if,  moreover,  such  colony,  by  passing  into  the 
hands  of  any  other  power,  would  become  dangerous  to  the  integrity  of  the  Union,  and 
manifestly  tend  to  the  subversion  of  our  laws,  — we  have  a  right,  upon  eternal  princi- 
ples of  self-preservation,  to  lay  hold  of  it.  This  principle  alone,  independent  of  any 
title,  would  warrant  our  occupation  of  West  Florida. 

**  We  are  told  of  the  vengeance  of  resuscitated  Spain.  If  Spain,  under  any  modifi- 
cation of  her  government,  choose  to  make  war  upon  us  for  the  act  under  considera- 
tion, the  nation,  I  have  no  doubt,  will  be  willing  to  meet  the  war.  But  the  gentleman 
reminds  us  that  Great  Britain,  the  ally  of  Spain,  may  be  obliged,  by  her  connection 
with  Spain,  to  take  part  with  her  against  us,  and  to  consider  this  measure  of  the 
President  as  justifying  an  appeal  to  arms.  Sir,  is  the  time  never  to  arrive  when  we 
may  manage  our  own  affairs  without  the  fear  of  insulting  his  Britannic  Majesty  ?  Is 
the  rod  of  British  power  to  be  forever  suspended  over  our  heads  ?  Does  Congress  put 
on  an  embargo  to  shelter  our  rightful  commerce  against  the  piratical  depredations 
committed  upon  it  on  the  ocean,  we  are  immediately  warned  of  the  indignation  of 
offended  England.  Is  a  law  of  non-intercourse  proposed,  the  whole  navy  of  the 
haughty  mistress  of  the  seas  is  made  to  thunder  in  our  ears.  Does  the  President 
refuse  to  continue  a  correspondence  with  a  minister  who  violates  the  decorum  belong- 
ing to  his  diplomatic  character,  by  giving  and  deliberately  repeating  an  affront  to  the 
whole  nation,  we  are  instantly  menaced  with  the  chastisement  which  English  pride 
will  not  fail  to  inflict.  Whether  we  assert  our  rights  by  sea  or  attempt  their  main- 
tenance by  land,  whithersoever  we  turn  ourselves,  this  phantom  incessantly  pur- 
sues us. 

"lam  not,  sir,  in  favor  of  cherishing  the  passion  of  conquest.  But  I  must  be 
permitted  to  conclude  by  declaring  my  hope  to  see,  ere  long,  the  new  United  States 
(if  you  will  allow  me  the  expression)  embracing,  not  only  the  old  thirteen  States, 
but  the  entire  country  east  of  the  Mississippi,  including  East  Florida,  and  some  of 
the  territories  to  the  north  of  us  also." 

There  is  another  illustration,  on  that  very  frontier,  as  to  what  kind 
of  danger  to  our  property  must  exist  in  order  to  justify  forcible  inter- 
position, and  from  which  it  can  readily  be  inferred  how  much  less  or 
remote  danger  would  make  it  our  duty  to  interpose  by  a  peaceful  pur- 
chase, even  if  some  risk  of  unjust  retaliation  against  us  should  accom- 
pany the  transaction.  In  the  House  of  Representatives,  on  the  8th 
of  January,  1811,  in  secret  session,  a  resolution  was  passed,  authoriz- 
ing the  President,  in  either  of  two  events,  to  take  possession  of  the 
Floridas.  (2  Executive  Journal,  pp.  180,  181.)  The  steps  were 
adopted  from  the  "intimate  relation  of  the  territory"  to  the  United 
States,  with  an  eye  "to  their  security  and  tranquillity"  and  con- 


412  RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS. 

sidering  the  "  peculiar  situation  of  Spain  and  of  her  American  prov- 
inces;" and  it  was  resolved  that  we  could  not,  "with  indifference," 
"  see  it  pass  from  the  hands  of  Spain  into  those  of  any  other  foreign 
power."  (p.  175.)  See  Mr.  Madison's  message  recommending  the 
step,  though  it  was  then  denounced  by  a  few  of  his  political  oppo- 
nents as  "  robbery  and  ivar"  while  others  vindicated  it  on  high 
principles  of  national  law.  (National  Intelligencer,  5th  January, 
1811.) 

The  British  minister  then  protested,  and  intimated  that  we  acted 
"  from  ambitious  motives ,"  or  by  a  desire  of  foreign  conquest  and 
territorial  aggrandizement.  How  exactly  does  the  senator  from  Mas- 
sachusetts now  tread  in  the  footsteps  of  the  British  minister !  Mr. 
Foster  urged  further  that  the  United  States,  under  this  pretext  of  a 
claim,  "cannot  expect  to  avoid  the  reproach  which  must  follow  the 
ungenerous  and  unprovoked  seizure  of  a  foreign  colony,  while 
the  parent  State  is  engaged  in  a  noble  contest  for  independence" 
at  home,  &c.     (2  State  Papers,  543.) 

Mr.  Monroe  replied  to  Foster,  July  8,  1811  (543),  and,  not  admit- 
ting the  right  of  England  to  interfere,  repels  the  motives  imputed, 
though  too  common  abroad. 

Again,  November  2,  1811,  he  says  we  had  claims  for  spoliations, 
&c,  on  Spain,  long  unsatisfied ;  looked  to  East  Florida,  as  means  near 
for  indemnity;  and  could  not  allow  them  to  go  out  of  our  reach,  "ivith- 
out  injustice  and  dishonor  to  ourselves ;  and  no  other  power  could 
take  East  Florida,  but  from  hostile  views  to  us."  Hence  the  act  of 
Congress  was  passed,  empowering  possession  to  be  taken  in  certain 
events.  (2  State  Papers,  p.  544.)  He  adds :  The  United  States 
"have  been  persuaded  that  remissness  on  their  part  might  invite 
the  danger,  if  it  had  not  already  done  so,  when  it  is  much  their 
interest  and  desire  to  prevent  it."    (p.  544.) 

Much  more  of  detail  on  this  can  be  seen  in  the  volumes  referred  to, 
and  our  own  files,  as  well  as  in  the  National  Intelligencer  of  June 
20th,  1811.  And  it  is  not  the  least  remarkable  coincidence,  that  the 
first  appearance  of  some  of  these  documents  was  then,  as  now,  by  an 
unlicensed  publication  of  them  in  a  newspaper  in  Connecticut,  proba- 
bly from  the  confidential  copy  of  some  senator,  with  a  view  to  make 
political  capital  against  Mr.  Madison,  and  by  which  the  Intelligencer 
justly  remarked  "the  public  interests  were  wantonly  disregarded." 
These  cases  are  all  those  where  force  was  used  or  contemplated,  and 
urging  excuses  for  it.  But,  in  that  of  Texas,  we  have  used  no  force, 
and  propose  to  use  none,  unless  unjustly  attacked ;  and  will  not  the 
reasons  already  recapitulated  excuse  defence  when  attacked,  if  they 
then  excused  force  in  the  first  instance  ? 

In  1820,  it  was  again  recommended  by  President  Monroe,  the  Sec- 
retary of  State  being  Mr.  Adams,  to  pass  a  law  to  take  possession  of 
the  Floridas,  notwithstanding  the  treaty  ceding  them  had  not  been 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  413 

ratified.  Some  of  the  reasons  urged  in  the  public  prints  were,  the 
necessity  of  them  for  safety  to  the  Southern  States,  for  better  protec- 
tion against  insidious  interference  from  abroad,  and  the  contempt,  as 
well  as  injustice,  attached  there  to  the  Spanish  power.  (Niles'  Reg- 
ister for  20th  December,  1820,  and  18th  March.) 

Let  it  not  be  said,  as  differing  from  the  present  case,  that  we  then 
had  claims  against  Spain  unsettled ;  for  we  now  have  important  ones 
against  Mexico. 

These  may  be  considered  by  some  as  bold  measures.  They  were 
recommended,  at  least,  by  bold  men, — men  who  knew  their  rights  and 
always  dared  to  maintain  them,  however  menaced  at  home  or  abroad. 
They  only  looked  for  the  path  of  duty,  and,  when  found,  moved  for- 
ward in  it,  swerving  neither  to  the  right  nor  left,  from  attempted 
intimidation  or  foreign  intrigue.  As  an  example  for  us  on  this  occa- 
sion, let  us  look  to  the  practical  exposition  of  their  principles  in  J.803, 
as  well  as  in  the  cases  of  1810,  1811,  and  1820,  just  referred  to. 

The  apprehension  of  any  difficulty  with  Spain,  who  remonstrated 
against  our  right  to  purchase  Louisiana,  did  not  deter  our  patriot 
fathers,  in  1803,  from  accomplishing  that  ever  memorable  duty  and 
glorious  act  of  policy ;  and  as  little  did  the  apprehension  of  a  seizure 
of  it  by  England,  in  her  war  with  France,  then  breaking  out,  alarm 
them  from  their  purpose.  Much  less  should  such  fears  swerve  us 
from  the  still  higher  and  more  numerous  obligations  that  urge  us 
onward  to  a  peaceful  acquisition,  not  made  in  the  spirit  of  aggrandize- 
ment, but,  beside  other  good  motives,  to  restore  what  was  our  own 
near  half  a  century  ago,  and  what,  by  Jefferson  and  Madison,  with 
the  whole  Congress  and  country,  except  a  small  disaffected  party,  was 
vindicated  as  a  purchase  just  and  necessary  for  national  security  and 
national  prosperity. 

On  what  ground  can  any  part  of  the  European  world  presume  to 
interfere  with  our  amicable  compacts  with  neighboring  States  on  this 
continent  ?  And  on  what  just  ground  are  we  to  be  deterred  from  what 
is  right,  honorable,  and  peaceful,  in  managing  our  own  affairs,  because 
displeasure  happens  to  be  expressed  at  it  by  "  Mrs.  Grundy,"  or  Lord 
Brougham,  or  Daniel  O'Connell'?  What  if  the  exhortation  of  one  of 
them  came  to  us  last  evening  across  the  Atlantic,  trying  to  rally  the 
whole  British  empire  to  interfere  at  once  to  prevent  the  annexation 
of  Texas  7 

England  forgets  that  she  recognized  our  independence  more  than 
half  a  century  ago ;  and  one  would  think  that  it  was  nearly  time  now 
for  her  oligarchy  to  refrain  from  intermeddling  in  our  affairs.  She  is 
in  an  admirable  position  to  denounce  our  thirst  for  acquiring  territory, 
when  she  has  added  encroachment  to  encroachment,  till  her  forts  and 
factories  encircle  the  whole  globe  almost  as  closely  as  her  light-houses 
do  her  coast. 

As  to  such  tirades,  and  the  threatened  scorn  or  censure  of  the 
world  at  large  on  us  for  the  transaction,  I  cannot  refrain  from 
35* 


414  RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS. 

recalling  to  your  minds  the  eloquent  sentiments  uttered  by  Mr.  Clay, 
in  1820,  when  the  recognition  of  the  South  American  provinces  was 
under  consideration,  and  when  the  reproaches  of  transatlantic  rivals 
were  held  up  in  terrorem  against  us. 

"  On  a  subject  of  this  sort,  Mr.  C.  asked,  was  it  possible  we  could  be  content  to 
remain,  as  we  now  were,  looking  anxiously  to  Europe,  watching  the  eyes  of  Lord 
Castlereagh,  and  getting  scraps  of  letters  doubtfully  indicative  of  his  wishes  ;  and 
sending  to  the  Czar  of  Russia,  and  getting  another  scrap  from  Count  Nesselrode  ? 
Why  not  proceed  to  act  on  our  own  responsibility,  and  recognize  these  governments 
as  independent,  instead  of  taking  the  lead  of  the  Holy  Alliance  in  a  course  which 
jeopards  the  happiness  of  unborn  millions  ?  Mr.  C.  deprecated  this  deference  for  for- 
eign powers.  If  Lord  Castlereagh  says  we  may  recognize,  we  do  ;  if  not,  we  do  not. 
A  single  expression  of  the  British  minister  to  the  present  Secretary  of  State,  then  our 
minister  abroad,  he  was  ashamed  to  say,  had  moulded  the  policy  of  our  government 
towards  South  America, —  an  expression  which,  like  Mr.  Adams'  definition  of  repub- 
licanism, had  been  construed  to  mean  anything  or  nothing.  We  look  too  much 
abroad,  Mr.  C.  said  ;  you  may  find  our  minister  in  England  at  one  time  at  the  door 
of  the  Horse-guards,  and  the  next  moment  in  Paternoster-row  purchasing  literature 
for  this  country.  Our  institutions,  said  Mr.  C,  now  make  us  free  ;  but  how  long 
shall  we  continue  so,  if  we  mould  our  opinions  on  those  of  Europe  ?  Let  us  break 
these  commercial  and  political  fetters  ;  let  us  no  longer  watch  the  nod  of  any  Euro- 
pean politician  ;  let  us  become  real  and  true  Americans,  and  place  ourselves  at  the 
head  of  the  American  system." 

Even  two  years  earlier,  in  a  speech  of  the  24th  of  March,  1818,  he 
exhorted  us  to  make  the  lead  in  favor  of  the  revolted  and  oppressed 
provinces  of  Spain,  in  "defiance  of  the  Divine  right  of  kings  to  rule." 
If  we  erred,  it  was  better  to  err  on  the  side  of  human  liberty.  He 
was  "  not  a  propagandist,"  but  had  sympathy  for  such  a  people ;  and 
would  recognize  them,  and  act  further,  "  as  circumstances  and 
interest  require"  (Vol.  I.  of  Speeches,  p.  85.)  If  we  were  our- 
selves independent,  we  ought  to  be  "guided  by  American  policy," 
and  "  obey  the  laws  of  the  system  of  the  new  world."    (p.  88.) 

In  doing  this,  as  I  have  recently  remarked  on  another  occasion,  if 
war  be' threatened,  or  actually  comes,  it  will  be  gratifying  to  reflect 
that  it  comes  wrongfully,  and  might  come  so  in  any  other  difficulty, — 
even  for  the  mere  acknowledgment  of  Texian  independence,  as  was 
menaced  by  Spain  in  a  like  case,  and  by  Santa  Anna  himself  for  still 
slighter  reasons.  But  whatever  nation,  heeding  threats  or  exposure  to 
unjust  war,  is  tempted  by  the  dread  of  them  to  turn  aside  from  the 
path  of  duty,  humanity,  and  honor,  is  itself  unfit  to  exercise  independ- 
ent powers,  and  should  be  re-annexed  to  her  ancient  masters. 

So  far  from  this  shrinking  having  marked  our  course,  even  under 
more  threatening  dangers,  in  1810,  1811,  and  1820,  we  went  still 
further  in  1823  than  before ;  we  avowed  a  determination  to  interpose 
ourselves,  if  any  new  foreign  power  should  presume  only  to  colonize 
anywhere  on  this  continent,  and  hence  much  more  if  in  Cuba  or  Texas, 
in  our  near  neighborhood ;  because,  more  than  ten  years  previous,  it 
had  been  foreseen  and  stated,  that  if  a  new  foreign  power  should  take 
possession  of  Cuba,  the  whole  Mississippi  valley  will  be  at  her  mercy. 
(Nat.  Int.  July  8,  1811.) 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  415 

"We  united  in  the  Congress  of  Panama,  even  before  Mexican  inde- 
pendence had  been  acknowledged  by  a  single  European  power;  one 
object  of  which  was  "  firmly  establishing  the  independence  of  each  of 
the  American  republics."   (Canaz  Letter,  96,  Appendix,  4th  Blount.) 

Another  object  was  to  concert  measures  to  prevent  Europe  from 
colonizing  further  in  any  part  of  the  American  continent.  (Saloza  to 
Clay,  Nov.  2,  1835,  p.  92,  Appendix.) 

And  this  rested  in  part  on  the  idea  that  such  a  colonization  would 
endanger  the  independence  and  safety  of  all  the  new  republics. 

In  1825,  under  Mr.  Adams'  administration,  Mr.  Clay,  as  Secretary 
of  State,  seems  to  have  been  authorized  to  state  officially,  not  only 
that  "  we  cannot  allow  a  transfer  of  the  island  (Cuba)  to  any  Euro- 
pean power,"  but  that  the  Mexicans  have  been  dissuaded  not  to  attack 
Cuba  in  the  war  with  Spain,  lest  it  might  lead  to  consequences  dan- 
gerous to  the  domestic  tranquillity  of  the  south.  (Clay  to  Middleton, 
Dec.  26,  1825 ;   Blount's  Register,  91.) 

It  therefore  not  only  became  a  common  object  in  this  continent  to 
prevent  new  foreign  settlements  and  influences  here,  but  wTe  labored  to 
enlist  friendly  powers  in  Europe  to  sanction  it ;  and  succeeded  in  con- 
vincing England  that  it  was  her  duty,  as  well  as  ours,  to  prevent  any 
nation  abroad  from  aiding  Spain  to  re-conquer  her  revolted  provinces. 
(2  Wheaton,  81  to  89.) 

But,  so  far  from  this  countenancing  any  force  or  intrigues  from 
abroad,  to  control  any  of  the  new  republics  here,  it  aimed  in  principle  at 
the  defeat  of  such  attempts,  as  well  as  of  ordinary  colonization.  It  tries 
to  secure  to  all  America  self-government,  free  either  from  European 
diplomacy  or  European  arms.  If  Texas,  or  any  other  republic, 
chooses  to  cede  a  part  or  all  her  territory,  and  unite  with  other  sister 
States  in  government,  what  right  has  Great  Britain  or  France  to 
interpose,  more  than  we  have  with  the  voluntary  union  of  Ireland  with 
England,  or  the  voluntary  separation  of  Belgium  from  Holland  ? 

A  war  in  Europe  may  arise  from  the  change  of  masters  over 
a  single  city  or  province ;  but  it  is  a  war  in  her  own  brotherhood  or 
system,  and  neither  connects  itself  with  changes  in  Asia,  though  of 
dominion  there  over  empires,  nor  recognizes  American  interferences 
in  Europe  or  Asia,  more  than  we  admit  of  European  ones  here.  Mr. 
Madison  says,  Europe  has,  in  many  respects,  a  system  of  policy  and 
interests  almost  peculiarly  her  own,  and  disconnected  from  other 
quarters  of  the  globe.  The  danger  of  foreign  interference,  and  of  col- 
lisions with  other  nations  than  Mexico,  is  really  more  imminent,  if  we 
postpone  annexation,  than  if  we  complete  it  forthwith.  In  this  last 
case,  the  door  is  shut  to  European  tactics.  Threats,  jealousies,  or 
favors,  intrigues  and  appliances  of  all  kinds,  will  be  superseded,  and 
future  struggles  or  blood  to  secure  ourselves  on  that  frontier,  worse 
than  anything  now  probable,  will  all  be  obviated. 

In  closing  these  remarks  on  officious  interference  from  abroad, 
and  manufactured  public  opinion  abroad,  I  say,  unhesitatingly,  that 


416  RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS. 

if  we  are  to  be  calumniated  for  exercising  a  constitutional  right  to 
purchase,  treat,  and  unite  with  an  independent  nation,  in  procuring 
again  an  empire  in  size,  which  we  once  owned,  and  is  occupied  by  our 
own  brethren, —  for  doing  this  by  peaceful  negotiation,  and  for  mutual 
benefits,  rather  than  by  rapacity  or  fraud, —  and  for  exposing  ourselves 
to  no  just  cause  of  war,  but,  on  the  contrary,  terminating  a  predatory 
and  barbarous  contest  in  behalf  of  liberty,  independence,  religious 
freedom,  the  Anglo-Saxon  race,  and  the  progress  of  humanity  and 
civilization, — I,  for  one,  am  ready  to  appear  at  the  bar  of  public  opin- 
ion, and  stand  prepared  to  abide  the  calm  judgment  of  both  cotempo- 
raries  and  posterity. 

Some  senators  have  deemed  it  a  duty  not  to  take  this  cession  on 
account  of  our  relations  with  Mexico,  and  the  fear  which  ought  to  be 
entertained  of  her  vengeance.  But  it  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that,  by 
this  cession,  if  our  former  positions  have  been  maintained,  we  thus 
violate  the  solemnity  of  our  treaties  with  Mexico.  It  is  no  violation 
of  them  to  consider  the  territory  of  Texas  as  not  Mexican,  but  as 
belonging  to  another  power  —  to  Texas  herself.  So  says  the  late 
Secretary  of  State ;  and  so  said,  in  1838,  our  treaty  of  limits  with 
Texas.  Even  if  Mexico  chooses  to  involve  us  in  war  on  that  account, 
we  are  not  guilty  of  such  a  violation,  any  more  than  we  were  by  our 
quasi  war  with  France  in  1798,  and  our  real  war  with  England  in 
1812 ;  as  we  then  had  solemn  treaties  of  peace  with  both  of  those 
powers  existing,  as  sacred  and  in  full  force  as  now  with  Mexico. 

It  is  begging  the  question  to  call  our  conduct  on  any  of  these  ques- 
tions a  violation  of  our  treaty  obligations. 

As  little  should  we  be  terrified  from  duty  by  the  apprehension  of 
Mexican  power,  when  exercised  unjustly ;  though  almost  every  speech 
on  the  other  side  begins  and  ends  with  war, — not  only  threatened,  but 
war  approaching, —  war  almost  in  our  midst.  But  we  should  fear  a 
neglect  of  duty  to  our  own  country  and  Texas  much  more  than  the 
proivess  and  success  of  Mexico,  which  have  been  so  exaggerated, 
while,  in  truth,  so  lame  and  impotent  as,  during  six  years  past,  to  kill 
a  few  women  by  Indians  and  convicts,  and  capture  one  judge  and  two 
or  three  travelling  editors  of  newspapers,  but  not  retain  a  single  foot 
of  land  or  a  single  fort.  And,  though  some  of  the  gentlemen  who 
engaged  in  this  debate  seemed  almost  to  see  merchants  fleeing, 
property  sequestrated,  commerce  plundered  on  the  ocean,  cities 
sacked,  and  Santa  Anna  ready  to  plant  (as  he  once  threatened)  the 
Mexican  standard  over  our  heads  on  the  dome  of  our  Capitol,  yet, 
unfortunately,  that  hero  has  heretofore  so  misbehaved  in  peace  as  to 
have  driven  most  of  our  traders  already  from  his  dominions,  and  to 
have  neither  power  to  come  here  by  water,  except  in  borrowed  vessels, 
nor  disposition  to  march  eastward  again  by  land  over  the  territory 
near  the  field  of  San  Jacinto. 

How  long  it  would  take  Mexico  to  re-conquer  Texas  when  allied 
with  us,  after  the  attempts  so  vain  and  so  long  on  her  unallied,  it  is 


RE- ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  417 

not  very  difficult  to  compute ;  and  I  think  the  nerves  of  our  wives  and 
daughters,  and  the  cradles  of  our  infants,  may  be  kept  tolerably  calm 
under  this  new  panic.  On  the  contrary,  Mexico  has  every  induce- 
ment to  pursue  a  policy  entirely  different,  and  more  worthy  her  nat- 
ural position. 

She  has  a  noble  opportunity,  on  this  occasion,  to  withdraw  from  her 
further  claims  with  dignity,  and  honor,  and  courtesy.  It  is  not  neces- 
sary that  she  should  formally  admit  what  has  so  long  seemed  apparent 
—  her  inability  to  re-conquer  Texas;  but  merely  acquiesce  in  the 
independence  of  a  territory,  whose  people  were  mostly  invited  there 
from  the  United  States  by  new  colonization  laws,  in  order  to  aid  her 
in  defence  against  Indian  aggressions, —  whose  education,  habits,  and 
religion,  do  not  accord  with  hers,  and  are  unsuited  to  harmonize  under 
her  system. —  and,  as  before  fully  showTn,  have  rightfully  resisted  it  ; 
and,  in  fine,  whose  valor  and  success  have  excited  the  sympathies  and 
confidence  of  most  of  the  world.  For  the  sake  of  meeting  the  wishes 
of  the  great  powers  of  that  world,  and  restoring  quiet  to  its  commerce, 
as  well  as  peace,  what  is  there  derogatory  in  saying  she  will  no  longer 
stand  up  against  the  public  opinion  of  Christendom  1  Spain  having 
done  the  same  by  Mexico,  and  England  by  us,  no  feeling  of  pride  is 
injured,  nor  the  slightest  humiliation  involved,  while  at  last  she  may 
win  some  glory  by  becoming  the  pacificator  of  much  of  the  new 
continent. 

Let  us  not,  then,  cling  to  this  twig,  or  dwell  on  that  small  flaw, — 
hang  a  doubt  on  one  loop,  and  an  old  prejudice  on  another.  But 
group  all  these  strong  incentives  to  action  together  —  add  the  political 
force  of  one  to  the  moral  strength  of  the  other,  and  the  urgent 
national  interests  in  future,  as  well  as  now,  so  deeply  involved,  to  the 
whole,  and  then  weigh  them  en  masse ;  and  if  they  do  not  show  a 
heavy  preponderance  of  duty  on  us  to  take  the  cession  immediately, 
I  must  confess  my  inability  to  weigh  properly  either  evidence  or 
principles. 

It  is,  however,  well  known  that  a  portion  of  this  body  deem  our 
right  to  acquire,  and  the  right  of  Texas  to  cede,  clear ;  and  our  duty, 
at  some  time,  to  carry  the  measure  into  effect  equally  clear ;  and  yet 
entertain  doubts  whether  the  present  moment  is  most  suitable  for  that 
purpose.     To  such  I  would,  in  conclusion,  submit  a  few  suggestions. 

The  annexation  of  Texas  has  been  deemed  desirable  now  by  our 
executive,  as  well  as  the  government  of  Texas ;  and  a  treaty  has  been 
finished  to  that  effect,  to  be  ratified  within  six  months.  Without 
strong  reasons,  what  has  been  duly  commenced,  as  of  national  magni- 
tude, should  be  completed. 

Again :  Texas  has  been  invited  to  institute  proceedings,  and  close 
the  treaty ;  and,  without  strong  reasons,  she  ought  not,  in  this  stage  of 
the  business,  to  be  disappointed  and  repudiated. 

The  reasons  acting  on  the  executives  of  both  countries — the  proper 
organs  to  commence  such  measures  —  have  been  sufficient  and  urgent, 


418  RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS. 

and  requiring,  in  their  view,  immediate  annexation.  It  is  well  known, 
also,  that  many  of  the  objections  hitherto  prevailing,  as  to  the  stability 
and  ripeness  of  Texian  independence,  and  as  to  the  probability  of 
re-conquest  by  Mexico,  have  been  much  weakened,  if  not  entirely 
removed.  Public  opinion,  too,  has  had  more  time  to  be  developed, 
and  has  been  fully  disclosed  in  favor  of  annexation  now,  by  public 
meetings  and  resolutions,  by  memorials  and  correspondence,  infinitely 
more  decisive  and  longer  than  when  it  was  negotiated  for  in  1825  or 
1829,  or  when  it  was  offered  in  1837.  A  rejection  now  is  likely,  also, 
to  be  construed  as  if  casting  dishonor  on  Texas,  after  inviting  her 
action  and  concurrence  in  the  cession  and  proceedings  so  far. 

We  have  been  trying  to  accomplish  the  re-annexation  for  more  than 
twenty  years ;  and  now,  when  peaceably  within  our  grasp,  can  it  be 
wisdom  to  let  it  escape,  for  reasons  of  form,  or  ceremony,  or  party  1 
If  it  be  a  mere  question  of  time,  as  some  urge,  then  why  not  seize 
time  by  the  forelock  1  Why,  in  the  language  of  the  late  national  con- 
vention, not  do  it  "as  soon  as  practicable"?  Delays,  also,  are  dan- 
gerous, lest  offence  be  taken  on  the  other  side,  and  the  proposition  be 
never  resumed.  So  a  delay  here  may  lead  to  alliances  and  guaranties 
elsewhere,  though  not  probably  to  re-union  in  government  with  a  mon- 
archy. Re-annexation  may  be  thus  defeated  long,  if  not  forever,  as 
well  as  a  dangerous  foreign  influence  planted  on  our  borders,  which 
will  not  only  peril  our  domestic  institutions  and  property,  as  the  Tex- 
ian constitution  is  open  to  change  on  all  subjects,  but  rob  us  of  the 
control  of  the  Gulf  of  Mexico,  and  girdle  us  around  from  New  Bruns- 
wick to  the  Sabine,  in  a  more  iron  and  deadly  gripe  than  that  contem- 
plated by  France  before  our  Revolution. 

I  say  nothing  here  on  the  disclaimers  of  England  as  to  abolition 
designs  with  us,  when  she  has  avowed  them  as  to  the  whole  world, — 
has  encouraged  them  in  Brazil  and  Texas,  if  not  on  the  La  Platte, — 
has  sheltered  our  slave  criminals  in  her  provinces  and  islands ;  but  I 
do  say  that  our  country,  and  our  whole  country,  cannot  see  with  indif- 
ference the  wall  she  is  closing  up  around  us.  Cuba  at  her  mercy  on 
the  south  whenever  war  approaches,  the  Gibraltar  of  the  Gulf  of  Mex- 
ico ;  the  Bahamas  on  the  east,  bristling  with  cannon ;  Halifax,  Que- 
bec, and  Maiden,  with  munitions  and  soldiery,  on  the  north-east  and 
north ;  the  Rocky  Mountains  on  the  west  barricaded,  and  the  mouth 
of  the  Columbia  fortified  by  her  Hudson's  Bay  Company ;  and  last, 
but  not  least,  Texas  on  the  south-west,  forced  almost  insanely  by  us 
into  her  influences  and  protection,  if  not  close  alliance.  Even  in  this 
debate,  some  senators  (Mr.  Choate)  have  considered  the  re-conquest 
of  Texas  by  her  old  oppressors  as  probable,  unless  annexation  to  us 
speedily  takes  place,  and  yet  refuse  that  annexation,  and  complacently 
foretell  that  there  is  another  mode  of  escaping  subjugation  by  accepting 
British  aid,  and,  I  presume,  of  course,  with  it,  British  abolition  con- 
ditions, as  well  as  British  control.  Beside  these  indications  of  the 
evils  likely  to  result  from  delay,  and  beside  the  readiness  of  Mexico  to 


RE-ANNEXATION   OF  TEXAS.  419 

continue  her  persevering  efforts  to  thwart  us  in  the  object  of  annexa- 
tion, by  any  cooperation  with  England,  we  have  already  had  a  fore- 
taste, since  1837,  of  the  gratification  felt  in  the  British  public  at  our 
short-sightedness  in  not  uniting  earlier  with  Texas,  and  the  sanguine 
hopes  of  their  future  influence  there  which  have  thus  been  excited. 
The  Edinburgh  Review  of  1841  says : 

"  The  United  States,  in  refusing  to  admit  Texas  into  their  confederation,  have 
rejected  an  otfer  which,  in  all  probability,  will  never  again  be  made  to  them ;  and 
Texas  becoming,  as  years  pass  by,  more  and  more  attached  to  its  own  institutions,  its 
own  distinct  policy,  and  its  own  national  policy,  and  its  own  national  character,  will 
speedily  regard  the  United  States  with  some  of  those  feelings  of  jealousy  which 
nations  always  learn  to  entertain  towards  their  nearest  and  most  powerful  neighbors. 
The  commercial  interests  of  Texas,  and  the  antipathy  to  the  northern  portion  of  the 
United  States  which  she  inherits  from  her  kindred  of  the  Southern  States,  will  always 
tend  to  unite  her  with  Great  Britain." 

After  detailing  the  advantages  of  a  close  alliance  between  Texas  and 
Great  Britain,  the  Review  adds  : 

"  The  bonds  of  ancient  kindred  may  thus  be  knit  with  fresh  strength,  and  the 
independence  of  Texas  create  only  a  wider  diffusion  of  the  British  race  and  British 
sympathies." 

After  going  over  the  inducements  existing,  both  in  Texas  and  in  the 
United  States,  to  the  conclusion  of  a  treaty,  and  remarking  that  the 
signature  of  it  "need  not  surprise  any  one,"  the  London  Herald  thus 
speculates : 

"  Such  a  treaty  would  (unless  the  consent  of  Santa  Anna  thereto  have  been  pre- 
viously obtained, —  a  most  unlikely  event)  lead  to  a  rupture,  if  not  to  hostilities, 
between  the  United  States  and  Mexico ;  and  even  if  it  did  not  produce  immediate  war, 
would  most  certainly  foster  the  '  mission '  to  overrun  Mexico  which  even  now  has 
possession  of  a  large  proportion  of  the  Anglo-Americans.  In  a  quarrel  arising  from 
such  a  cause,  England  and  France  would  have  a  right  to  interfere,  if  only  because 
annexation  affected  their  acquired  interests  in  Texas.  It  is  the  policy  of  both  coun- 
tries to  support  Mexico  as  a  counterpoise  to  the  United  States;  and  England  has 
an  especial  ground  for  the  preservation  of  Texian  independence  in  its  influence  on 
Canada." 

Suppose  that  Mr.  Jefferson  had  listened  to  delay  in  the  purchase  of 
Louisiana  for  only  a  single  month,  the  war  being  renewed  between 
England  and  France,  would  have  made  it  a  prey  to  British  superiority 
at  sea ;  and  all  the  evils  now  deprecated  as  to  the  security  of  the  com- 
merce and  cities  of  the  Mississippi,  and  the  domestic  tranquillity  of  the 
south,  would  have  been  earlier  felt,  and  earlier  agitated  the  whole 
Union.  (See  Marbois'  Hist,  of  Louisiana.) 

What  is  the  bearing  of  the  new  correspondence  on  this  subject  ?  It 
is  most  significant.  It  discloses  the  fact  that  Texas  deems  a  new  and 
formidable  invasion  from  Mexico,  when  she  hears  of  this  treaty,  to  be 
so  probable  as  not  to  be  willing  to  enter  upon  making  it  without  assur- 
ances of  aid  from  us,  if  the  exigency  occurs  while  the  negotiations  are 
pending.     So  much  is  certain,  that  if  we  reject  the  treaty,  or  delay  it, 


420  RE-ANNEXATION    OF   TEXAS. 

and  the  invasion  comes,  Texas  must  be  satisfied  that  no  just  aid  can 
constitutionally  be  granted  by  us.  What,  then,  must  be  her  next 
resource  1  Will  it  be  to  take  the  field,  and  wade  through  carnage, 
expense,  and  conflagration,  to  repel  it  victoriously  alone,  as  she  doubt- 
less may,  according  to  the  experienced  judgment  of  the  senator  from 
Missouri  1  Certainly,  rather  than  submit  to  Mexican  re-conquest  and 
Mexican  chains ;  but  certainly  not,  if  she  can  avert  both  the  carnage 
and  the  chains,  with  honor,  by  an  arrangement  with  England  or 
France,  after  making  the  first  offer  to  us,  and  experiencing  a  humili- 
ating refusal.  In  a  single  month  after  such  refusal  or  delay,  it  will 
be  wise  and  natural  for  her  to  guard  against  new  contingencies,  though 
not  to  become  an  integral  part  of  the  British  or  French  monarchies, 
and  abandon  her  republican  institutions  and  independence,  but  to  receive 
the  guaranty  of  one  of  them  against  Mexican  oppression.  Of  course, 
it  would  be  on  such  terms  as  are  honorable  and  acceptable  to  both  par- 
ties, and  leave  no  motive  for  renewed  negotiations  with  us ;  on  such 
terms  as  will  secure  life  and  property,  restore  peace  to  her  industry 
and  commerce,  grow  cotton  for  England  independent  of  us, —  a  most 
vital  object  to  her, —  improve  the  finances  of  Texas,  and  fill  up  her 
rich  domain,  not  by  us  and  ours,  and  to  our  benefit  and  glory, 
but  with  millions  from  other  quarters  of  the  world,  who  have  so 
long  been  repulsed  by  her  hitherto  embarrassed  and  unsettled  rela- 
tions. If,  then,  a  more  intimate  union  is  ever  to  take  place  with  us, 
it  is  my  solemn  conviction  that  "now's  the  day  and  now's  the 
hour." 

These  apprehensions  are  so  far  from  being  visionary,  that  numerous 
similar  arrangements,  by  more  powerful  States,  with  youthful  and 
small  republics,  have  occurred  and  continued  for  centuries. 

How  striking  in  the  case  of  the  Hanse  Towns  and  other  free  cities 
of  Germany  !  How  momentous,  at  times,  in  that  of  the  Swiss  can- 
tons !  in  that  of  Geneva, —  Genoa  !  How  desirable  to  us  once,  when 
the  protection  and  assistance  of  France  were  obtained  under  certain 
mutual  guaranties,  but  without  our  becoming  a  part  of  France,  or  a 
dependency,  or  ever  feeling  disposed,  however  much  pressed,  to  renew 
our  governmental  relation  with  England,  though  attached  to  her  by 
origin,  education,  and  religion,  almost  as  strongly  as  the  people  of 
Texas  can  be  to  us  ! 

The  correspondence  before  us,  published  as  well  as  unpublished, 
proves  that  these  gloomy  apprehensions,  if  the  present  golden 
moment  be  not  seized,  are  likely  soon  to  be  realized.  Not  so  much,  I 
admit,  by  rapacity,  as  by  intrigue  and  interest  elsewhere  (as  evinced 
by  Mr.  Huskisson,  in  debate,  as  long  ago  as  1830),  and  thus  to  place 
in  the  hands  of  another  foreign  and  rival  power  a  possession  more 
dangerous  to  all  our  western  as  well  as  southern  interests  and  com- 
merce than  Cuba  herself, —  Cuba,  which,  for  twenty  years,  has  been 
publicly  tabooed  by  our  Presidents  and  Secretaries  from  all  foreign 
interference.     If  we  postpone  at  all,  then,  let  me  ask  to  what  time  ? 


KE-ANNEXATION   OF   TEXAS.  421 

to  what  4th  of  July  are  we  to  wait  for  the  occupation  of  this,  as  of  the 
north-eastern  territory  since  lost  1  Our  people  are  as  acquisitive  in 
their  propensities,  and  especially  about  lands,  as  most  others.  Hence, 
when  peaceful  restorations  of  what  was  once  our  own,  and,  from  its 
great  value  and  importance,  should  never  have  been  parted  with,  are 
offered,  they  would  hardly  justify  that  procrastination  which  may  again 
be  the  thief  to  rob  them  of  the  prize. 

The  instincts  of  a  great  people  are  also  seldom  wrong ;  and  those 
of  ours  have  long  run  in  the  channel  of  sympathy  for  the  down- 
trodden,—  especially  their  own  relatives  and  neighbors, —  attachment 
to  those  daring  to  be  free ;  and  knowing  what  confidence,  courage,  and 
strength,  were  inspired  into  our  fathers,  in  their  struggle  for  independ- 
ence, by  the  kindness  and  approbation  of  others,  they  will  always  be 
true  to  those  instincts;  and  as  far  as  justice,  honor,  and  right,  may  war- 
rant— which  they  are  believed  to  do  here  —  immediate  annexation,  they 
will  march  fearlessly  up  to  the  line  of  duty. 

If  we  look  further,  the  dominion  of  the  whole  American  continent 
will  be  seen  to  be  at  stake.  Shall  it  rest  in  America,  or  in  a  small 
island  on  the  coast  of  Europe '?  Shall  it  be  in  a  republic,  or  a  mon- 
archy ?     In  us  and  our  posterity,  or  in  our  oppressor  and  rival  ? 

The  commerce  of  America, —  the  great  surplus  commerce  of  both 
worlds, —  on  what  does  it  chiefly  depend  ?  and  where  and  whence 
shall  it  flow  ?  Under  whose  guidance  ?  whose  protection  ?  Look 
into  these  matters  as  connected  with  this  question,  and  decide  whether 
we  shall,  in  truth,  be  independent  in  substance,  or  only  in  form  !  Ex- 
hibiting self-confidence,  liberty,  and  defiance,  somewhere  else  than  on 
our  lips ;  or  stoop  in  action  to  temporize,  vacillate,  and  delay,  if  not 
succumb  to  other  powers  !  * 

*  There  is  another  speech  of  Judge  Woodbury  on  this  subject,  but  it  is  omitted  in 
this  selection.  We  have  omitted,  also,  a  speech  on  the  Tariff,  which  may  be  found  in 
the  Congressional  Debates. 

36 


REPORTS. 


REPORTS. 


ON  THE  SAFE-KEEPING   OF  THE  PUBLIC   MONEY. 


The  arrangements  for  keeping  the  public  money  which  had  been 
in  successful  operation  for  a  few  years  previous  to  the  passage  of  the 
cleposite  act  of  1836  became  partially  embarrassed  by  carrying  into 
effect  some  of  its  provisions.  But  the  enforcement  of  them  all,  where 
not  entirely  perfected,  was  in  seasonable  progress  in  May  last,  when 
the  department  was  compelled,  by  the  act,  to  give  notice  to  such  of  the 
selected  banks  as  had  suspended  specie  payments  that  they  could  no 
longer  be  considered  as  general  depositories  of  the  public  moneys. 
(See  circular  I.)f 

A  list  is  annexed  of  all  before  employed  in  that  capacity  which  have 
been  discontinued.     (K.)  f 

After  due  inquiries  to  procure  other  depositories,  in  conformity  to 
the  act,  the  department  has  completed  the  appointment  of  only  one. 
This,  and  four  more  that  have  not  suspended,  with  one  that  has 
resumed  specie  payments  (making  six  in  all),  constitute  the  present 
bank  depositories  for  general  purposes.     A  schedule  of  them  is  added. 

(L.)t 

During  the  inability  to  obtain  specie-paying  banks  at  other  points, 

the  treasurer  —  being  required,  by  the  closing  part  of  the  8th  section  of 

the  act,  to  keep  and  disburse  the  public  money  according  to  the  laws 

before  in  force  —  has  done  it  in  conformity  to  the  very  wide  discretion 

which  existed  when  no  rules  were  in  force  that  had  been  prescribed 

by  Congress,  except  to  "keep"  and  " disburse  the  same"  under  the 

general  superintendence  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.     A  part  of 

it  has,  therefore,  been  kept  in  special  deposit  in  this  city,  a  portion 

of  it  in  the  mint,  and  the  residue  with  the  officers  collecting  it,  until 

*  From  the  Report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  ;  made  September  3d,  1837. 
t  Printed  with  the  Report,  September  5,  1837. 
36* 


426  ON   THE   SAFE-KEEPING   OF   THE   PUBLIC   MONEY. 

it  was  wanted  for  public  purposes,  or  until  it  accumulated  in  such 
sums  at  any  point  as  not  to  be,  probably,  wanted  there  for  such  use. 
(See  two  circulars,  M  and  N.)*  In  the  first  case,  it  has,  from  time 
to  time,  been  applied  to  the  payment  of  creditors,  by  drafts  on  the 
receivers  or  collectors  :  and  in  the  last,  the  excess  has  been  directed  to 
be  temporarily  placed  with  banks  not  remotely  situated,  and  in  special 
deposite  for  safety,  until  wanted  for  expenditure  elsewhere,  or  until 
some  new  legislation  shall  take  place  in  relation  to  it. 

Under  these  circumstances,  the  department  would  respectfully  sug- 
gest some  provisions  which  may  be  more  specific,  and  may  be  required 
for  the  safe-keeping  and  disbursing  of  the  public  moneys. 

In  the  present  condition  of  the  government  and  the  country,  two 
systems  are  proposed,  either  of  which,  it  is  believed,  may  be  practicable 
and  adequate  to  the  exigencies  of  the  crisis.  One  is,  an  enlargement 
and  adaptation  of  the  system  partially  employed  since  the  suspension 
of  specie  payments,  so  as  to  make  it  answer  all  necessary  purposes. 
This  could  be  effected  merely  by  assigning  to  our  existing  officers  and 
establishments  some  additional  duties. 

The  treasurer,  at  the  seat  of  government, — the  mint,  with  its  branch 
at  New  Orleans,  and  another  which  has  been  contemplated,  and  is 
much  needed  at  New  York,  for  other  purposes, —  collectors  of  the 
customs,  and  receivers  of  money  for  the  sales  of  land,  as  well  as  post- 
masters,—  might  all  be  directed  to  keep  in  safety,  not  only  the  public 
money  collected  by  them,  but  all  actually  placed  in  their  possession, 
by  transfer  or  otherwise.  As  fiscal  agents,  they  might  also  be  required 
to  pay  over  and  transfer  it  for  such  public  purposes  as  may  be  author- 
ized by  Congress,  and  under  such  regulations  as  the  treasury  depart- 
ment from  time  to  time  may  prescribe.  Indeed,  the  third  section  of 
the  post-office  law  of  1825,  with  the  bond  taken  under  it  as  to  the 
agency  of  the  postmasters,  is,  perhaps,  already  sufficiently  broad  for 
that  class  of  officers.  At  points  like  New  York,  and  a  few  others, 
where  a  likelihood  existed  that  the  sums  would  permanently  be  large, 
but  which,  under  a  reduced  revenue  and  expenditure,  would  seldom 
occur,  authority  might  be  given  to  appoint  the  clerks  now  acting  as 
cashiers  or  tellers  under  the  collectors  and  receivers,  or  other  more 
suitable  persons,  to  act  as  keepers  and  paymasters  of  the  public  money. 
But  they  should  be  made  independent  of  the  collectors  and  receivers, 
and  placed  under  the  like  tenure  of  office,  and  under  suitable  bonds. 
Additional  means  of  safety,  and  such  additional  but  limited  compensa- 
tion to  any  of  the  above  officers,  might  be  provided,  as  the  increased 
risk  and  labor  might  render  just ;  but  in  only  a  few  cases  would  these 
last  be  much  augmented  at  any  place. 

Taking  the  year  1834  as  furnishing  a  specimen  sufficiently  large  of 
the  probable  business  in  future  connected  with  the  general  operations 
of  the  treasury  department,  but,  of  course,  not  including  the  separate 

*  Printed  with  the  Report,  Sept.  5,  1837. 


ON   THE   SAFE-KEEPING   OF   THE   PUBLIC   MONEY.  427 

establishment  of  the  post-office,  the  whole  number  of  warrants  issued 
in  that  year  was  a  little  under  five  thousand ;  and,  though  differing 
much  in  actual  amount,  averaging  about  five  thousand  dollars  each. 
This  would  be  less  than  twenty  warrants  a  day,  and  hence  would 
require  less  than  one  per  day  to  be  paid  in  each  of  the  twenty-six 
States.  They  differed,  in  fact,  from  four  per  day  in  this  district,  and 
two  per  day  in  New  York,  which  were  the  highest  numbers,  to  only 
one  per  week  in  several  of  the  States.  (See  Table  P.)  *  The  busi- 
ness at  each  office  daily,  or  even  weekly,  in  making  payments  of  the 
drafts,  would,  therefore,  be  very  little.  If  more  than  one  draft  issued 
on  a  warrant,  the  business  would  be  increased  in  that  proportion,  unless 
the  whole  payments  were  reduced,  as  is  probable,  hereafter,  to  sixteen 
or  seventeen  millions  yearly. 

In  regard  to  the  risk,  five  millions  in  the  treasury  at  any  one  time, 
if  all  placed  in  the  hands  of  collectors  and  receivers,  would  not,  on  an 
average,  exceed  thirty  thousand  dollars  with  each  of  the  present 
number. 

But  if  the  amount,  besides  one  million  in  the  mint,  was  chiefly  in 
the  hands  of  half  the  present  number,  which  would  approach  nearer  to 
the  probable  result,  the  sum  with  each  would  still  be  less  than  most 
of  the  existing  bonds  of  receivers ;  and  when  exceeding  theirs,  or  those 
of  the  principal  collectors,  the  excess,  in  most  cases,  could  be  readily 
prevented,  or  reduced,  by  being  drawn  out  to  pay  creditors,  or  be  con- 
veniently transferred  to  the  treasurer  of  the  United  States,  at  the  seat 
of  government,  or  to  the  mint  and  its  branches.  Until  one  of  the 
latter  is  authorized  at  New  York,  the  substitute,  before  mentioned,  of 
one  of  the  present  officers  in  the  customs  there  as  an  independent 
keeper  and  paymaster  of  the  public  money,  could  be  adopted,  and,  if 
deemed  prudent,  be  extended  to  any  other  similar  place. 

In  this  mode,  the  present  number  of  officers  connected  with  the  col- 
lection and  disbursement  of  the  revenue  throughout  the  United  States 
need  not  be  at  all  increased.  Nor  will  it  become  necessary,  except  in 
a  few  cases,  to  augment  their  compensation.  Twenty  or  thirty  thou- 
sand dollars  a  year  would  probably  cover  the  whole  additional  expense 
of  every  kind. 

The  other  system  to  which  the  attention  and  consideration  of  Con- 
gress are  respectfully  invited,  is  a  new  organization,  by  means  of 
commissioners  or  receivers-general,  to  gather  the  collections  to  more 
central  points,  and  keep  and  disburse  there  a  large  portion  of  the  public 
money,  or  such  as  could  not  be  kept  safely  and  expended  conveniently 
in  the  hands  of  the  collecting  officers.  Such  an  organization  might  be 
at  only  three  or  four  of  the  most  important  points ;  or  it  might  be 
made  more  extensive,  and  the  number  enlarged  to  eight  or  ten.  This 
could  be  arranged,  in  all  essential  particulars,  substantially  in  the 
manner  which  is  now  in  very  successful  practice  in  some  of  the  most 

*  Printed  with  the  Report,  September  5,  1837. 


428  OjST  the  saee-keepixg  of  the  public  moxey. 

enlightened  and  opulent  governments  of  Europe,  and  as  was  urgently 
recommended  by  this  department  as  early  as  1790.  (See  extract  0.)  * 
The  /)nly  material  difference  need  be,  to  pay  out  more  of  the  money 
near  the  places  where  it  is  collected,  rather  than  first  to  transmit  most 
of  it  to  the  seat  of  Government.  This  organization  of  fiscal  agents 
would  be  advantageous  as  a  separate  establishment  for  this  business 
alone,  and  as  an  independent  check  on  most  of  those  collecting  the 
revenue.  But  it  would  require  some  addition  to  the  present  number 
of  officers,  and,  in  the  first  instance,  would  more  increase  the  public 
expenses. 

But  the  whole  addition  of  principal  officers  need  not  exceed  ten. 
Nor  would  the  increased  annual  expense  to  the  government  probably 
amount  to  over  fifty  or  sixty  thousand  dollars,  as  the  system  would 
enable  both  the  war  and  navy  departments  to  dispense  with  several 
of  their  agents  for  making  local  disbursements.  The  danger  of  any 
losses  will  be  nearly  the  same  under  both  plans.  It  is  impossible  to 
conduct  the  affairs  of  government,  or  the  ordinary  transactions  of 
society,  without  trust  and  risk  of  some  kind.  But  one  great  object, 
wherever  pecuniary  confidence  is  reposed,  should  always  be  to  require 
the  best  safeguards  which  appear  reasonable ;  and  in  either  of  these 
systems,  as  hereafter  explained,  the  amount  trusted  can  be  more  easily 
kept  from  becoming  excessive,  and  the  hazard  of  losses,  affecting  the 
deposite  agent  by  his  lending  or  trading,  be  fully  obviated,  by  the 
strict  prohibition  of  both  the  latter,  under  severe  penalties. 

Our  direct  losses  from  either  collecting  or  deposite  agents  have 
always  been  comparatively  small.  Those  by  the  former,  it  is  believed, 
have  not  equalled  those  by  the  latter ;  though  the  latter,  being  banks, 
have  usually  in  the  end  paid  most  of  their  deposites.  The  losses  by 
the  former  are  also  supposed  not  to  have  exceeded  one-fifth  of  those  on 
the  bonds  of  merchants  for  duties,  and  probably  not  one-eighth  of  those 
from  the  purchasers  of  public  lands,  under  the  credit  system. 

Occasional  and  strict  examinations  of  the  money  on  hand,  where 
large  in  amount,  would  furnish  a  strong  safeguard  beyond  the  char- 
acter of  the  officer,  and  the  property  of  himself  and  sureties,  and  which 
it  might  be  provided  should  be  made  by  a  committee  of  Congress,  or  in 
any  other  mode  deemed  most  eligible  to  constitute  an  effectual  check. 

The  plans  which  have  been  explained  as  to  fiscal  agents  are 
suggested  for  consideration,  under  a  belief  that  either  is  appropriate  in 
the  present  posture  of  affairs ;  that  they  require  but  slight  changes  in 
our  existing  laws  or  usages ;  and,  whatever  objections  can  be  adduced 
against  them,  will,  at  the  same  time,  be  found  to  possess  many  signal 


They  will  not,  so  much  as  some  other  modes  of  keeping  the  public 
money,  expose  the  treasury  to  disappointments  and  delays,  through  a 
dangerous  partnership  of  interest,  or  the  use  of  that  money  for  private 

*  Printed  with  the  Report,  September  5,  1837. 


ON  THE   SAFE-KEEPING    OF   THE   PUBLIC   MONEY.  429. 

or  corporate  purposes.  As  the  vicissitudes  of  trade  or  speculation 
affect  the  persons  Avho  borrow  from  the  public  banking  depositories,  the 
evil  consequences  must  sometimes  inevitably  reach  and  embarrass  the 
treasury  itself.  Nor,  on  the  other  hand,  will  these  modes,  like  our 
former  one,  cause  frequent  injury  to  those  who,  trading  on  the  revenue 
of  the  government,  are  subject  to  be  most  pressed  to  refund  it  when 
least  able.  It  is  believed,  likewise,  that  the  funds  of  the  treasury  can 
be  always  more  readily  commanded  in  a  legal  currency,  and  the  hopes 
of  its  creditors  not  defeated,  nor  its  faith  violated  so  often,  if  the  money 
is  not  loaned  out,  either  in  full  or  in  part,  but,  as  in  other  countries, 
is  retained  in  specie  or  its  equivalent,  and  in  the  actual  custody  of 
officers  exclusively  fiscal.  In  other  countries,  the  public  money  is 
believed  to  be  seldom,  if  ever,  chargeable  to  the  treasurer,  till  it  is 
either  paid  over  on  some  draft,  so  that  he  can  get  credit  for  the  pay- 
ment (and  which  mode  is  practised  somewhat  in  England,  as  well  as 
here,  and  extensively  in  France),  or  lodged,  not  in  deposit  in  any 
bank,  but  in  his  own  possession  at  the  seat  of  government.  In  the 
former  mode,  the  systems  now  proposed,  and  especially  the  first  one, 
would  operate  so  as  to  disburse  at  each  point  most  of  the  public  money 
collected  near,  and  would  thus  enable  the  treasury  to  command  its 
resources  with  less  delay ;  the  money  not  being  previously  paid  over 
at  some  distance,  and  to  a  separate  set  of  agents,  as  has  usually  been 
the  practice  here  in  the  use  of  banks ;  nor  much  of  it  transported 
inconveniently  to  the  capital,  as  has  usually  been  the  practice  else- 
where. This  mode  would  thus  possess  one  of  the  greatest  excellences 
in  any  fiscal  system ;  which  is,  to  pay  over  quickest  to  the  public  cred- 
itor, and  with  the  least  official  complexity,  whatever  is  collected  from 
the  public  debtor. 

Besides  these  advantages,  others  would  be,  that  the  money  in  the 
treasury,  under  both  of  the  plans  submitted,  can  always  be  more  easily 
kept  down  to  moderate  dimensions  by  reductions  in  the  revenue,  and 
by  temporary  investments  of  an  occasional  surplus,  as  there  will  be  no 
antagonist  interest  connected  with  it,  wishing  for  loans  and  the  use  of 
surpluses,  and  thus  cooperating  to  prevent  a  reduction. 

The  existing  establishments  and  officers,  whenever  convenient,  would 
be  employed  without  a  double  machinery,  or  the  organization  of  a  new 
system  of  agents.  Executive  control  would  be  diminished  rather  than 
increased  by  them,  because  any  additional  officers  will  be  selected,  not 
by  the  President  alone,  nor  the  treasury  department,  as  the  banks 
now  are,  but  virtually  be  designated  by  Congress,  and  the  principal 
incumbents  appointed  by  the  consent  of  the  Senate.  They  would  also 
remove  all  ground  for  the  objection  sometimes  urged  against  the  for- 
mer system,  that  the  executive  alone  exercises  an  extensive  patronage 
and  great  monied  influence  through  a  host  of  bank  presidents,  direct- 
ors, and  stockholders,  scattered  through  every  section  of  the  country, 
and  selected  without  the  assent  or  check  of  either  House  of  Congress 
in  any  particular  case,  and  making  loans  of  the  public  money  from 


430  ON   THE   SAFE-KEEPING    OF   THE   PUBLIC   MONET. 

considerations  merely  political  or  official.  A  very  wide  discretion  will 
be  thus  restricted,  and  a  prolific  source  of  suspicion  and  imputation  of 
favoritism  and  partiality  be  entirely  stopped. 

The  officers,  under  the  plans  proposed,  will  likewise  be  amenable 
exclusively  to  the  General  Government,  and  not  be  embarrassed,  like 
the  officers  of  the  banks,  by  conflicting  duties  and  interests  in  respect 
to  the  States ;  nor  involved  in  those  collisions,  jealousies,  and  recrimi- 
nations, often  attendant  on  that  position. 

The  independent  and  harmonious  action  of  each  government  in  its 
appropriate  sphere  will  thus  be  more  fully  secured.  The  local  institu- 
tions, as  a  general  principle,  will  be  left  to  the  care  and  uses  of  the 
several  States  which  established  them,  without  interference  on  the  part 
of  the  General  Government,  and  to  be  regulated  or  discontinued,  as 
deemed  most  useful  under  their  own  State  policies,  and  most  con- 
ducive to  the  original  purposes  of  their  creation.  Nor  would  any 
general  monied  corporation,  aside  from  the  grave  doubts  which  exist  as 
to  both  its  constitutionality  and  general  expediency,  have  been  likely, 
in  such  a  crisis  as  that  of  the  war  of  1812,  or  perhaps  that  of  the  last 
spring,  to  have  proved  a  much  safer  public  depository  than  those  local 
institutions.  Though  more  convenient  in  form  for  fiscal  purposes  than 
they,  and  free  from  some  objections  as  to  want  of  symmetry  and 
accountability  which  obtain  against  them,  yet,  if  chartered  on  usual 
principles,  and  judging  from  experience  here  as  well  as  abroad,  it  must 
have  failed,  in  a  trial  like  those,  to  have  sustained  either  our  pecuniary 
operations  or  its  own,  in  strict  good  faith  and  in  due  vigor. 

Without  entering  into  details  to  illustrate  this  position,  it  is  neces- 
sary to  notice  only  the  single  circumstance,  that  the  Bank  of  England, 
during  a  severe  war,  suspended  specie  payments  near  a  quarter  of  a 
century,  and  that  neither  of  the  two  United  States  Banks  existed  so 
as  to  be  obliged  to  encounter  such  a  peril.  But  since  the  last  Spring, 
the  notes  of  the  second  one,  to  the  amount  of  several  millions,  have 
been  allowed  to  sink  into  the  mass  of  irredeemable  and  depreciated 
paper,  though  issued  under  all  the  high  securities  and  sanctions  of  a 
charter  from  the  General  Government,  and  with  very  large  funds,  still 
under  the  control  of  officers  and  trustees  deemed  by  the  stockholders 
exceedingly  skilful,  and  bound  by  both  law  and  contract  to  redeem 
those  notes  in  specie,  and  on  demand. 

The  systems  which  have  been  proposed  in  this  report,  if  adopted, 
could  not  be  expected  to  continue  entirely  exempt  from  losses  by  that 
unfaithfulness  or  casualty  to  which  all  trusts  in  human  affairs  are 
exposed.  But  they  may  be  surrounded  with  strong  safeguards,  and 
would  very  probably  soon  be  enabled  to  answer  in  a  satisfactory  man- 
ner every  purpose  of  the  government,  in  its  condition  so  different  in 
many  respects  from  that  which  formerly  existed,  and  which  was  the 
paramount  cause  urged  for  the  incorporation  of  our  two  former  United 
States  Banks.  Its  finances  are  not  now  burdened  with  a  national 
debt  of  from  seventy  to  one  hundred  and  thirty  millions,  and,  besides 


ON   THE   SAFE-KEEPING   OF  THE   PUBLIC   MONEY.  431 

our  ordinary  expenses,  with  the  annual  payment,  on  account  of  prin- 
cipal and  interest,  of  from  ten  to  sixteen  millions,  to  be  first  widely 
collected,  and  then  transferred  and  disbursed  at  only  a  few  points  on 
the  sea-board.  It  is  now  with  a  yearly  revenue  reduced  from  thirty 
and  forty  millions  to  near  twenty,  and  probably  soon  to  be  only  six- 
teen or  seventeen,  and  with  a  course  of  expenditure  which  can  readily 
be  diminished  so  as  not  much,  if  any,  to  exceed  the  revenue  in  a  nat- 
ural state  of  business.  In  large  sections  of  our  country,  and  in  such 
a  state  of  business,  this  expenditure  happens  nearly  and  very  conven- 
iently to  correspond  in  amount  with  the  receipts  in  the  same  sections. 

We  are,  likewise,  reposing  in  peace,  with  very  superior  means  of 
communication,  whether  by  mail  or  personal  intercourse,  and  with  a 
greatly  increased  and  increasing  portion  of  gold  in  the  currency,  to 
render  distant  transfers  and  payments  more  easy.  It  is  manifest, 
therefore,  that  our  fiscal  concerns  will  be  greatly  lessened  in  amount 
as  well  as  difficulty,  unless  we  shall  be  visited  by  wars  or  other 
scourges  involving  us  in  debts  and  embarrassments  of  an  aggravated 
character,  and  which,  fortunately,  no  sufficient  reason  appears  for 
anticipating  at  an  early  day. 

Under  the  proposed  arrangements,  the  transfers  from  certain  points 
could  be  often  effected,  when  required  by  the  department  for  public 
purposes,  not  only  with  ease,  but  so  as  greatly  to  facilitate  the  domes- 
tic exchanges,  in  the  mode  of  employing  drafts  suggested  in  a  subse- 
quent portion  of  this  report.  In  a  more  natural  and  ordinary  state  of 
receipts  and  expenditures,  like  that  in  1834,  the  transfers  required  to 
a  great  distance  would  not  exceed  two  or  three  millions  during  the 
year;  and  almost  the  whole  of  them  were,  at  that  time,  in  such  a 
direction  as  to  yield  a  profit,  rather  than  be  expensive  to  the  banks 
which  made  them. 

If  the  treasurer  were  required  to  receive  payment  in  advance,  at 
certain  convenient  points,  for  all  lands  sold,  as  has  once  been  the  con- 
struction of  the  act  of  1820,  the  probability  is,  that  very  soon  all  the 
unfavorable  transfers  rendered  necessary  would  become  quite  unim- 
portant in  amount,  and  less  expensive  than  the  transportation  of  specie 
and  paper  has  been  heretofore,  from  the  distant  land  offices  to  the 
nearest  deposite  banks,  before  much  of  it  was  paid  to  the  public  cred- 
itors. It  will  be  seen  that,  by  these  modes  of  keeping  the  public 
money,  it  would  not  be  indispensable  to  employ  any  banks  as  a  pre- 
scribed part  of  the  system,  although  it  might  sometimes  be  convenient 
to  use  them  as  individuals  do,  and  as  subordinate  fiscal  officers  often 
do,  in  other  countries,  for  the  deposit  and  transfer  of  large  sums,  and 
particularly  for  special  deposites,  when  looking  merely  to  safety  and 
an  early  occasion  to  use  the  money. 

No  act  of  Congas,  until  the  charter  of  the  last  Bank  of  the  United 
States  in  1816,  required  the  public  money  in  the  treasury  to  be  kept 
on  deposit  in  any  bank  whatever.  The  whole  subject  was  left  to  the 
discretion  of  this  department.     Even  that  charter  permitted  the  Sec- 


432  LOSSES  FROM   BANKS  AND   BANK-PAPER. 

retary  of  the  Treasury  to  remove  the  deposites  from  the  Bank  of  the 
United  States,  when  he  thought  proper. 

In  the  supplemental  report  from  this  department,  in  1834,  on  the 
keeping  and  disbursing  of  the  public  money,  a  state  of  things  like  the 
present  was  adverted  to  and  considered.  It  was  observed,  in  regard  to 
such  an  occurrence,  that  it  will  then  "become  necessary  to  devolve 
these  duties  on  some  receiver  or  collector  already  in  office,  or  on  some 
safe  agent  not  now  in  office,  as  has  been  the  practice  for  years,  in  this 
country,  in  paying  pensions  at  convenient  places,  near  which  there  was 
no  State  bank  or  branch  of  the  United  States  Bank,  and  as  has  long 
been  the  usage  in  some  countries  of  Europe,  by  having  the  revenue  in 
certain  districts  chiefly  received,  kept  and  transmitted,  through  private 
agents  and  brokers." 

But  it  was  added,  that  "  though  the  fiscal  operations  of  the  govern- 
ment could,  undoubtedly,  still  proceed  through  the  personal  agencies 
before  mentioned,"  and  without  any  banks,  State  or  national,  yet  "it 
would  be  at  some  inconvenience  and  increase  of  expense,  unless  reme- 
died in  a  manner  that  may  hereafter  be  developed  ;  and  would  not,  in 
the  opinion  of  this  department,  and  in  the  present  condition  of  things, 
be  so  eligible  a  system  as  the  present  one;  because  banks,  though 
exposed  to  some  dangers  and  evils,  and  though  not  believed  to  be 
necessary  for  the  fiscal  purposes  of  any  government,  and  much  less  of 
one  in  the  present  happy  financial  situation  of  ours,  are  frankly 
acknowledged  to  be,  in  many  respects,  a  class  of  agents  economical, 
convenient,  and  useful." 


LOSSES   FROM  BANKS  AND  BANK-PAPER* 

Treasury  Department,  February  11,  1841. 
Sir  :  The  following  report  is  submitted,  in  compliance  with  a  reso- 
lution which  passed  the  Senate  on  the  7th  ultimo,  in  these  words  : 

"Resolved,  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  he  directed  to  communicate  to  the 
Senate,  at  as  early  a  period  as  practicable,  in  a  detailed  and  tabular  form,  all  the 
information  in  the  power  of  his  department  in  answer  to  t^c  following  questions  : 

*  Report  made  while  Secretary  of  the  Treasuvj,  Feb.  12,  1841;  showing,  in  com- 
pliance with  a  resolution  of  the  Senate,  the  losses  of  the  General  Government,  and  by 
the  people  of  the  United  States,  from  the  use  of  banks  and  bank-paper. 


LOSSES   FROM   BANKS  AND   BANK-PAPER.  433 

"  1.  What  amount  has  the  Federal  Government  lost,  from  its  organization  to  this 
time,  by  the  employment  of  banks,  by  the  use  of  bank-paper,  or  by  its  connection  in 
anywise  with  banks,  including  the  depreciation  of  bank-paper  ? 

"  2.  What  amount  the  people  of  the  United  States  have  lost,  from  the  commence- 
ment of  the  government  to  this  time,  by  the  failure  and  the  suspension  of  banks,  and 
by  the  depreciation  of  bank-paper,  by  the  loss  and  destruction  of  bank-notes,  and  by 
the  existence  of  banks  and  the  use  of  bank-paper  generally. 

"  3.  What  have  the  people  and  government  of  the  United  States  paid,  directly  and 
indirectly,  to  the  aggregate  banks  of  the  United  States,  for  the  use  of  those  institu- 
tions, annually,  for  the  last  ten  years  ? 

"  4.  What  proportion  of  the  stock  of  the  several  banks  of  the  United  States  is  at 
this  time  owned  by  foreigners  ?  " 

Several  of  these  inquiries  involve  considerations  which  cannot  easily 
be  presented  in  the  "detailed  and  tabular  form"  desired  in  the  reso- 
lution. Again :  many  of  them  require  explanations  and  limitations, 
or  qualifications,  that  could  not,  amidst  the  pressure  of  numerous 
other  engagements,  and  within  the  short  period  of  a  few  weeks,  be 
accurately  prepared,  even  in  the  shape  of  notes  to  statistical  state- 
ments. Most  of  them,  also,  are  in  themselves  incapable  of  much  cer- 
tainty, and  can  only  be  approximated  by  a  few  ascertained  data,  and 
the  best  estimates  formed  upon  them  which  the  imperfect  character  of 
the  materials  that  can  be  procured,  and  my  own  want  of  leisure,  may 
warrant.  But  all  the  information  in  possession  of  the  undersigned, 
bearing  on  the  matter  of  the  resolution,  and  susceptible  of  being 
brought  into  the  form  required  by  its  provisions,  will  be  submitted  at 
this  time,  accompanied  by  such  notes  as  seem  to  be  necessary  to  pre- 
vent misapprehension,  and  give  useful  explanations  as  to  the  calcula- 
tions. The  rest  must  be  left  to  future  research  and  computation  by 
others.  The  whole  might  fill  volumes ;  since  what  is  now  presented, 
instead  of  exhausting  the  subject,  is  only  enough  to  excite  thinking 
and  inquiry  elsewhere. 

As  the  data  themselves,  and  the  grounds  or  principles  adopted  in 
the  estimates,  are  usually  given,  an  opportunity  will  exist  for  others  to 
judge  of  their  approach  to  accuracy,  and,  so  far  as  imperfect,  to  cor- 
rect them,  hereafter,  on  more  certain  information. 

It  is  evident,  by  the  language  of  the  resolution,  that,  under  the 
word  "loss,"  or  "lost,"  to  the  government  and  the  people,  are  meant 
the  gross  losses,  without  computing  or  deducting  any  supposed  benefits 
by  the  banking  system.  From  this  circumstance,  and  the  fact  that 
any  such  benefits  are  not  required  to  be  computed,  they  are  not  inves- 
tigated and  reported  on  under  any  of  the  different  heads  of  inquiry. 
It  is  further  manifest,  from  the  same  circumstances,  that,  by  the  word 
"loss,"  or  "lost,"  are  meant  to  be  embraced  those  losses  sustained  by 
any  portion  of  the  people,  without  deducting  the  unusual  gains  made 
at  the  same  time  by  the  directors  and  other  persons  immediately  con- 
nected with  banks,  or  by  brokers  and  speculators.  The  computations 
are,  therefore,  founded  on  that  hypothesis. 

Table  A  contains  the  answer  to  the  first  inquiry,  which  is  in  these 
37 


434  LOSSES  FROM  BANKS  AND   BANK-PAPER. 

words:  "What  amount  has  the  Federal  Government  lost,  from  its 
organization  to  this  time,  by  the  employment  of  banks,  by  the  use  of 
bank-paper,  or  by  its  connection  in  anywise  with  banks,  including  the 
depreciation  of  bank  paper?"  It  presents  the  losses  under  this  head 
as  follows  : 

From  the  employment  of  banks  as  public  depositories,  previous  to 
1837,  and  since  1837,  separately ; 

From  their  notes  taken  and  not  redeemed  previous  to  1837,  and 
since;  and 

From  depreciation  on  their  notes  taken  between  1814  and  1817, 
inclusive,  and  since. 

It  then  gives  the  computed  interest  on  the  whole,  and  the  aggre- 
gate. 

Various  other  considerations,  as  to  indirect  losses  from  the  connec- 
tion of  the  government  with  banks,  could  be  suggested  under  this 
inquiry ;  but  as  the  results  would  not  depend  on  actual  returns,  but 
be  very  hypothetical,  they  are  omitted,  except  an  allusion  to  some  of 
them  in  a  note  to  this  table. 

Indeed,  I  do  not  propose  to  embody  in  this  report  any  of  the  results 
computed  in  any  of  the  tables. 

They  are  subject  to  so  many  limitations  and  contingencies,  requir- 
ing explanation,  that  it  seems  more  proper  to  consider  them  merely  in 
connection  with  the  notes  furnishing  the  explanation. 

Tables  B  1  to  B  5  exhibit  data  in  reply  to  the  second  inquiry, 
which  is :  "  What  amount  the  people  of  the  United  States  have  lost, 
from  the  commencement  of  the  government  to  this  time,  by  the  fail- 
ure and  suspension  of  banks,  and  by  the  depreciation  of  bank-paper, 
by  the  loss  and  destruction  of  bank-notes,  and  by  the  existence  of 
banks  and  the  use  of  bank-paper  generally." 

B  1  contains  the  number  of  banks  in  the  United  States  that  failed 
between  1789  and  1841,  so  far  as  the  same  can  be  ascertained  and  esti- 
mated, with  the  amount  of  their  capital. 

There  is  added  to  them  such  portion  of  the  banks  now  suspended  as 
are  expected  never  to  resume  again. 

B  2  contains  the  losses  to  the  community  by  the  failures  before 
mentioned,  as  computed  on  their  capital,  circulation,  deposites,  and 
balances  owing. 

B  3  contains  the  losses  to  the  people,  computed  on  "the  depre- 
ciation of  bank-paper,"  in  the  case  of  banks  that  have  suspended 
specie  payments,  but  are  not  entirely  failed  or  broken ;  and  the  loss, 
by  such  depreciation,  on  deposites  and  balances  in  those  banks. 

B  4  contains  the  estimated  "  losses  and  destruction  of  bank-notes  " 
by  accidents,  &c. 

B  5  exhibits  an  aggregate  of  the  losses  computed  under  the  whole 
of  the  second  head  of  inquiry. 

Besides  those  specified  in  the  former  tables,  many  indirect  and  sev- 
eral general  injuries  have  occurred  from  "  the  existence  of  banks," 


LOSSES  FROM   BANKS  AND   BANK-PAPER.  435 

such  as  counterfeit  notes ;  increased  interest  paid  for  loans ;  premiums 
to  brokers  for  exchange  of  bank-paper ;  expansions  and  contractions 
of  issues,  leading  to  ruinous  fluctuations  in  prices,  augmented  expend- 
itures in  living,  sacrifices  of  property,  &c.  &c.  Most  of  them  are 
adverted  to  in  this  table  and  the  notes,  but  are  often  too  conjectural  in 
their  amount  to  be  reduced  to  any  tabular  data,  and  are  sometimes 
mixed  with  benefits  that  have,  in  part,  counterbalanced  them,  though 
not  easily  to  be  computed  in  figures. 

Table  C  contains  data  in  answer  to  the  third  inquiry :  u  What  have 
the  people  and  government  of  the  United  States  paid,  directly  and 
indirectly,  to  the  aggregate  banks  of  the  United  States,  for  the  use  of 
those  institutions,  annually,  for  the  last  ten  years?" 

It  first  presents  the  average  amount  of  capital  and  discounts  of  all 
the  banks  in  the  United  States  during  the  last  ten  years,  and  the 
amount  of  their  estimated  gross  annual  income  during  that  period.  It 
then  computes  such  part  as  may  be  considered  more  than  six  per  cent, 
on  their  capital;  and,  also,  more  than  that  and  their  reasonable 
expenses. 

These  furnish  almost  the  only  tangible  data  for  ascertaining  what 
seems  to  be  desired  under  this  head. 

I  have  merely  added  some  computations  of  a  part  of  the  cost  of  the 
present  banking  system  to  the  community  "during  the  last  ten 
years,"  caused  by  various  losses  incident  to  its  operations,  as  explained 
in  Table  B  5. 

Table  D  contains  a  reply  to  the  fourth  and  last  inquiry  :  "  What 
proportion  of  the  stock  of  the  several  banks  of  the  United  States  is, 
at  this  time,  owned  by  foreigners?" 

It  gives  all  the  facts  in  possession  of  the  department  bearing  on  this 
point,  with  estimates  thereon ;  which,  though  formed  on  data  some- 
what imperfect,  are  probably  near  the  truth. 

Table  E  is  a  statement  on  the  amount  of  currency  in,  or  circulation 
of,  bank-notes  and  specie  in  this  and  other  countries,  at  different  peri- 
ods. It  was  originally  published  by  Congress,  from  a  report  of  this 
department  made  by  the  undersigned  in  December,  1834.  It  has 
been  revised,  and  some  addition  of  other  facts,  since  procured,  are  pre- 
sented, both  in  the  body  of  the  table  and  in  the  notes  annexed.  This 
is  done,  because  its  contents  are  referred  to  so  frequently  for  some  of 
the  data  on  which  parts  of  the  computations  in  the  preceding  tables 
are  grounded.  Respectfully, 

LEVI  WOODBURY, 

Secretary  of  the  Treasury. 
To  the  President  of  the 

Senate  of  the  United  States. 


436  LOSSES  FROM   BANKS   AND   BANK-PAPER. 

A. 

Losses  sustained  by  the  Federal  Government,  by  the  Employment 
of  Banks  and  Bank-paper,  before  the  Year  1837,  and  since. 

Loss   estimated   by   the    treasury   department  on   the 

depreciation  of  bank-notes  received  prior  to  1837,         c$>5,500,000 

Loss  appearing  on  the  books  of  the  treasury  by  banks 

as  depositories  prior  to  1837,  about  .         .         .  900,000 

Loss  estimated  by  using  banks  as  depositories  since  the 

year  1837, «100,000 

Loss  estimated  on  bank-notes  taken  and  not  redeemed 

prior  to  1837, 80,000 

Loss  estimated  on  bank-notes  taken  and  not  redeemed 

since  1837, M0,000 


Aggregate, 6,620,000 

Computed  interest  on  the  aggregate,    ....      8,872,000 
Total  principal  and  interest, 15,492,000 

a  This  is  an  estimated  loss  upon  nearly  $400,000  due  by  the  late  deposite  hanks  to 
the  treasurer  and  disbursing  agents.  This,  it  is  hoped,  will  prove  more  than  the  final 
loss  on  the  books  of  the  department. 

b  This  is  an  estimate  upon  about  $100,000  of  bank-notes  in  the  possession  of  the 
government,  or  belonging  to  it,  though  the  loss  on  them  may  turn  out  to  be  less. 

c  Estimated,  by  Mr.  Gallatin,  at  more  than  four  millions.  (See  "  Considerations 
on  the  Currency  and  Banking  System,"  p.  51.)  My  computation  was  made  a  few 
years  ago,  and  founded  only  on  the  discount  or  depreciation  of  the  bank-notes  once 
and  at  first  received  for  duties,  lands,  and  loans;  and  it  may  be  too  small  for  all 
kinds  of  losses  under  this  head,  as  it  differs  so  much  from  the  estimate  made  by  the 
Committee  of  Ways  and  Means  (House  of  Representatives)  in  1830.  Considering 
that  the  prices  paid  for  provisions,  services,  &c,  were  also  much  higher  during  the 
suspension,  the  committee  are  likely  to  be  more  near  the  truth  regarding  the  indirect 
losses,  if  not  the  direct  ones. 

Loss  estimated  by  that  committee,  on  the  depreciation  of  bank-notes  received  prior 
to  1817,  $34,000,000.  (See  Report  of  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means,  House  of 
Representatives,  April  13,  1830,  explanatory  of  this.)  In  this  aspect  of  losses,  the 
committee  are  supposed  to  take  into  consideration  the  facts,  that,  after  August,  1814, 
loans  were  made  to  the  government  in  irredeemable  paper,  at  a  high  premium,  and 
which  loans  were  finally  discharged  in  specie,  or  its  equivalent.  For  example  :  One 
hundred  dollars  in  specie,  or  its  equivalent,  were  used  in  1824  in  redeeming  a  certifi- 
cate of  stock  issued  in  1814  for  $100,  and  for  which  only  $88  had  been  received  by 
the  government;  and  that  in  bank-notes,  at  a  discount  then  of  seven  to  twelve  per 
cent,  compared  with  specie. 


LOSSES  FROM  BANKS  AND   BANK-PAPER.  437 

B  1. 

Number  and  Capital  of  Banks  which  have  failed  in  the  United 
States  since  1789. 

1.  From  1789  to  1811 : 

Ascertained  and  estimated  at  twenty  in  number,  and  a  capital  aver- 
aging each  $150,000. 
This  would  make  the  capital  of  all  failing  between  1789 

and  1811 $3,000,000 

2.  From  1811  to  1830  : 

Ascertained  and  estimated  at  195  in  all,  viz. : 

Ascertained  by  Mr.  Gallatin,  in  his  Considerations  on  Banks,  165. 

Capital  of  129  known, $24,247,309 

Capital  of  36  not  known,  and  estimated  by  me  in  nearly 
a  like  ratio,  at  $190,000  each,  ....    6,840,000 

[Capitals  of  both  estimated  by  Mr.  Gallatin  at  near 
$30,000,000.    (Considerations  on  Banks,  p.  50.)] 

Computed  to  have  been  unknown  to  Mr.  Gallatin,  30 
banks  with  like  capital, 5,700,000 

[See  Gouge  on  Banking,  p.  224,  part  2d,  first  edition, 
where  it  is  stated  that  28  more  had  been  ascertained 
than  were  in  Mr.  Gallatin's  list.] 

Whole  capital  of  banks  failing  between  1811  and  1830,      36,787,309 

3.  From  1830  to  1841 : 

The  banks  considered  to  be  already  broken,  or  failed 
entirely,  since  1830,  are  supposed  to  have  been*about 
150;  of  which  140  have  been  ascertained.  The 
average  capital  must  be  at  least  $300,000  each.  This 
would  make  the  capital  of  the  150  equal  to     .         .    $45,000,000 

[The  capital  is  estimated  higher,  on  the  average,  than  in  those  fail- 
ing before  1830,  as  greater  capitals  have  been  more  common  since; 
and  the  capitals  of  all  the  banks  in  the  Union  are,  at  this  time,  known 
to  be,  on  an  average,  rather  larger  than  this  estimate,  or  near 
$400,000  each.  They  are  the  smallest  in  New  England,  where  the 
failures  have  been  fewest.] 

4.  It  is  apprehended  that  several  banks,  which  are  now 
suspended,  over  the  southern  and  western  parts  of  the 
United  States,  and  particularly  in  Mississippi  and 
Michigan,  will  prove,  in  the  end,  to  have  failed 
entirely,  and  will  therefore  never  resume.  Their 
37* 


438  LOSSES  FROM   BANKS  AND   BANK-PAPER. 

number  is  computed  to  be  at  least  30,  and  their  capi- 
tal must  be  $400,000  each  (the  average  in  the 
Union),  as  some  have  a  very  large  capital,  especially 
in  Mississippi.     This  would  make      .         .         .         $12,000,000 

[I  should  not  be  surprised  if  the  result  hereafter  shows  the  number 
and  the  amount  of  the  capital  of  the  banks  now  suspended,  which  have 
failed  entirely  and  will  never  resume,  to  be  larger.  The  above  com- 
putation does  not  include  the  Bank  of  the  United  States,  which,  while 
this  report  was  preparing,  has  suspended  specie  payments  a  third  time, 
viz.,  on  the  4th  of  February,  having  resumed  on  the  15th  of  January, 
1841,  after  its  second  suspension,  October  8,  1839.  Its  first  suspen- 
sion was  May  15,  183T.  If  the  present  one  is  to  be  regarded  as  a 
failure,  as  many  fear  (its  stock  having  been  quoted  as  low  in  New 
York  as  26  on  the  hundred),  an  addition  of  $35,000,000  will  have  to 
be  made  to  the  capital  of  the  banks  that  have  failed. 

Several  other  banks  in  Pennsylvania,  Delaware,  and  Maryland,  have 
suspended  a  third  time,  since  the  4th  instant,  and  consequent  upon  the 
stoppage  of  the  United  States  Bank  on  that  day ;  but  whether  any 
ultimate  loss  is  likely  to  be  sustained  by  any  of  them,  as  having  failed 
entirely,  cannot  yet  be  ascertained.] 

Summary. 

5.    Capital  of  20  banks,  failing  before  1811,     .         .         $3,000,000 
Capital  of  195   banks,  failing   between   1811  and 
1830,  .        .        .        .        .        .        .        36,787,309 

Capital  of  the  150  banks,  of  which  140  are  ascer- 
tained to  have  failed  between  1830  and  1841,    .         45,000,000 
Capital  of  30  banks  now  suspended,   which  have 

probably  failed,     .         .         .         .         .         .         12,000,000 

Whole  number  395,  and  their  whole  capital,     .         .      $96,787,309 

[This  number  of  395  banks,  computed  to  have  failed  in  fifty  years, 
may  seem  high;  but  it  is  not  so  large  as  in  England,  where,  not- 
withstanding any  favorable  influence  of  a  national  bank  existing  near 
a  century  and  a  half,  it  has  happened  that  from  1793  to  1826,  —  a 
period  of  only  thirty-four  years, —  381  failures  of  banks  have  occurred, 
on  which  bankrupt  commissions  were  taken  out.  Near  four  times  as 
many  more,  it  is  said,  failed  within  that  time  and  compromised. 
(Tucker  on  Money,  p.  252.) 

McCulloch's  Dictionary,  p.  95,  says,  "  Some  bankrupt  concerns 
were  arranged  without  a  commission;"  but  I  think  he  does  not  give 
the  number. 

It  will  be  remembered  that,  in  all  these  calculations,  the  number  of 
banks  in  the  United  States  is  computed  as  the  number  of  banks  and 
branches,  each  of  the  latter  being  added  as  one.] 


LOSSES  FROM  BANKS  AND   BANK-PAPER.  439 

B  2. 

Losses  by  the  Banks  which  have  failed  since  1789,  computed  on 
their  Capital,  Circulation,  Deposites,  and  Balances  owing. 

1.  The  whole  capital  of  the  banks  that  have  failed  since  1789  being 
ascertained  and  estimated  (as  in  B  1)  at  $96,787,309,  the  loss  of  the 
whole  of  it,  on  an  average,  in  one-half  of  the  cases,  is  deemed 
probable. 

[See  what  is  considered  capital,  Table  CI.] 
Then  it  would  on  them  amount  to  .         .         .         .       $48,393,654 
In  the  other  cases,  the  loss  is  computed,  on  an  average, 

to  extend  to  only  half  the  capital,  or    .         .         .         24,196,827 

This  would  make  the  aggregate  loss  on  the  capital     .      $72,590,481 

[See  Gallatin  on  Banking  and  Currency,  page  50,  as  to  the  uncer- 
tainty on  this  subject.  The  recent  suspension,  on  the  4th  of  February, 
1841,  before  referred  to  (Table  B  1),  may  require  a  large  addition  to 
the  amount  of  capital  in  banks  that  have  failed.  But,  on  the  contrary, 
so  much  of  this  last  capital  is  owned  abroad  (see  Table  D)  that  the  loss 
to  our  own  people  will  not  be  greatly  enhanced  thereby.] 

2.  The  circulation  out,  when  these  banks  failed,  being 
usually  large  in  banks  of  that  character,  must  be  esti- 
mated at  an  amount  equal,  at  least,  to  half  of  their 

capital, $48,393,654 

[In  1838,  in  eight  States,  the  circulation  equalled  half  the  amount 
of  the  capital  of  all  their  banks.  (See  Bank  Report  from  the  treas- 
ury department  for  that  year.)] 

The  estimated  loss  on  the  circulation  is  put  at  only  half  as  much, 
in  proportion,  as  on  the  capital ;  because,  if  means  exist,  the  circula- 
tion must  be  paid  before  any  part  of  the  capital. 

Thus,  instead  of  three-fourths  of  the  whole  circulation 
being  lost,  estimate  only  three-eighths  of  it ;  making 
the  whole  loss  on  circulation     ....         $18,147,620 

[Probably  the  people  at  large  lose  quite  half  on  this 
circulation,  though  the  brokers  may  not  lose  over  three- 
eighths.] 

3.  All  deposites  and  bank  balances  owing  by  broken 
banks  are  estimated  at  half  the  amount  of  capital,  as 
insolvent  banks  owe  largely,  in  most  cases.  Both 
the  balances  and  deposites,  together,  are  considered 
equal  in  amount  to  the  circulation,  and  the  loss  on 

them  would  be,  at  nearly  the  same  rate,        .         .         18,147,620 


440  LOSSES   FROM   BANKS   AND   BANK-PAPER. 

[In  1837,  in  nine  States,  the  circulation  and  deposites, 
without  including  the  balances,  appear,  from  actual  re- 
turns, to  have  amounted  to  as  much  as  the  capital.  (See 
Treasury  Bank  Report  for  that  year.)  Perhaps  some 
would  think  the  bank  balances  should  not  be  included, 
because  due  to  other  banks ;  but  this  point  is  not  certain, 
and  they  are  not  large.] 

The  whole  loss  by  bank  failures  would  then  be         .      $108,885,721 

For  example : 

Loss  on  capital,         .         .         .         $72,590,481 
Loss  on  circulation,  .         .         .  18,147,620 

Loss  on  deposites  and  balances  to  banks,  18,147,620 

$108,885,721 

[Among  the  banks  that  have  failed,  the  part  of  their  capital  owned 
abroad  has  not  been  large,  if  the  last  suspension  of  the  United  States 
Bank  be  not  regarded  as  a  failure.  Very  little  deduction,  therefore, 
should  be  made  on  the  whole  computed  loss  to  our  own  people,  on  that 
account.    (See  Table  D.)     But  it  might  require  something.] 


B  3. 


Losses  by  the  Community,  through  Depreciation  of  Bank-paper, 
in  Cases  of  Suspe?ision  of  Specie  Payments. 

1.  The  first  general  suspension  of  specie  payments  by  the  banks  in 
the  United  States  commenced  in  August,  1814,  and  continued  till 
1817,  in  some  places,  and  years  longer  in  others,  as  well  as  extended 
over  most  of  the  country,  except  the  principal  part  of  New  England. 

The  whole  paper  circulation  out  in  1814,  whether  active 

or  in  other  banks,  was  about     ....         $75,000,000 

[See  table  of  circulation,  E.] 

The  portion  of  it  issued  by  the  banks  that  suspended  was 

about $50,000,000 

On  this,  the  depreciation  varying  in  different  parts  of  the 
country  from  ten  to  twenty  per  cent.,  the  average  was 
about  fifteen  per  cent. ;  making  a  loss,  at  first,  to  those 
then  holding  the  notes,  equal  to  $7,500,000 

[See,  on  the  amount  of  depreciation,  Gallatin  on  Cur- 
rency, in  Appendix,  and  Treasury  tables  on  exchanges 
and  price  of  bank-notes ;  Gouge  on  Banking,  part  2d,  p. 


LOSSES   FROM   BANKS  AND   BANK-PAPER.  441 

65.  In  England,  after  1809,  the  depreciation  fell  to 
fifteen  per  cent.  Lowe  on  State  of  England,  pp.  112, 
113.] 

[Some  may  think  the  estimated  loss,  at  first,  of  fifteen 
per  cent,  on  the  notes  out,  too  high  on  another  account, 
because  debtors  often  pay  them  away  at  par.  But,  if 
this  be  done  on  an  old  debt,  the  creditor  loses  the  depre- 
ciation :  so  if  it  be  for  a  salary,  for  rent,  an  annuity,  &c. 
But  if  the  notes  are  paid  at  par,  on  a  new  debt  or  pur- 
chase, the  price  of  the  articles  sold,  or  of  the  services 
performed,  for  the  new  debt,  is  charged  as  much  higher, 
in  most  cases,  as  the  depreciation  on  the  notes.  (See 
Gouge  on  Banking,  part  1,  p.  60 ;  Report  on  Charter  of 
Bank  of  England,  1832,  pp.  463-465 ;  Raguet  on  Cur- 
rency, pp.  162,  163 ;  McCulloch's  Dictionary,  page  95, 
"great  injury  to  creditors  and  the  public.")] 

During  the  three  years,  this  whole  currency  must  have 
been  used  at  least  twice  more  by  persons  at  a  similar 
loss,  without  being  able  to  adapt  contracts,  prices, 
wages,  &c,  to  its  depreciated  value,  making  .         15,000,000 

[The  same  money  changes  hands  very  often,  and,  in 
sea-ports,  it  is  computed  to  occur  once  in  every  two  days. 
(Lowe  on  State  of  England,  15,  Appendix.)] 

Whole  loss  from  1814  to  1817,  .       $22,500,000 

2.  At  the  suspension  of  183T,  the  whole  circulation 

out  was  about $150,000,000 

On  this,  the  first  loss,  at  nearly  a  similar  per  cent., 

would  be $22,000,000 

[See  Baguet  on  Currency,  p.  162,  &c. ;  table  of 
exchange  and  prices  of  bank-notes  by  treasury  depart- 
ment.] 

Computing  only  one  more  use  of  it  at  a  loss,  within  the 
shorter  period  of  a  year  to  a  year  and  a  half,  on  the 
ground  above  stated,  it  would  be  22,000,000 

Whole  loss  from  1837  to  1838,       .         $44,000,000 

3.  At  the  suspension  in  1839,  limited  to  the  country 
south  and  west  of  New  York,  the  circulation  out  in  that 

part  was  about $75,000,000 

[See  same  Table  E,  and  Treasury  Bank  Report  for  1839.] 


442  LOSSES  FROM   BANKS  AND   BANK-PAPER. 

The  loss,  at  the  same  average  per  cent.,  at  first,  was       $11,250,000 
Computing  one  more  loss,  within  the  year  and  one-fourth 

already  expired,  that  would  be    .         .         .         .         11,250,000 

Whole  loss  from  1839  to  1841,       ....      $22^500^000 

4.  To  this  may  properly  be  added  a  considerable  sum 
for  the  depreciation  at  other  times  on  the  paper  of 
several  detached  banks,  which  have  suspended  specie 
payments,  and  afterwards  resumed,  in  different  States 
and  districts  of  the  Union.  For  this  an  estimate  is 
made  of  only  $50,000  annually,  on  an  average,  during 
the  whole  period  from  1790  to  1805;  $150,000  annu- 
ally, from  1805  to  1820,  being  in  the  east  great  in 
the  first  six,  and  in  the  west  in  the  last  three  years 
of  the  time,  and  the  same  annually  since ;  being  large 
in  the  west  and  south-west  in  the  first  five  years  of 
the  time,  and  small  in  the  next  ten,  but  greater  since. 

The  aggregate  on  this  amount  would  be       .         .         $6,000,000 

This  would  make  the  whole  loss  to  the  community,  by 
the  depreciation  only  on  the  notes  of  suspended  banks 
out  at  the  time  they  stopped  paying  specie,  .         $95,000,000 

[The  losses  on  bank-notes  where  the  banks  have 
entirely  failed,  and  never  resumed  specie  payments,  are 
not  included  here,  but  are  computed  in  Table  B  2.] 

5.  The  losses  on  deposites  and  bank  balances,  occurring 
during  the  above  period,  are  not  specifically  called 
for  ;  but  they  are  large,  and  arise  from  the  deprecia- 
tion on  the  notes  taken  for  them  during  a  suspension 
of  specie  payments,  and  hence  they  properly  come 
under  this  head.  They  must  be  as  much  per  dollar 
on  all  actually  paid  over  in  notes  during  the  suspen- 
sion as  on  the  bank-paper  at  first  in  circulation.  The 
whole  amount  of  such  deposites  and  balances  must  have 
equalled  very  nearly  the  amount  of  bank-paper  at  first 
abroad,  when  the  suspension  happened.  (See  B  2, 
head  3d.) 

Supposing  that  one-half  of  them  only  were  drawn  out 
while  the  bank-paper  was  depreciated  (which  is  a 
moderate  computation),  and  that  they  were  drawn 
out  in  such  paper ;  the  aggregate  loss  on  them  must 
have  been 47,500,000 

The  aggregate  of  these  losses  by  depreciation  on  the 
notes  out,  where  suspension  of  specie  payments  have 
happened  with  banks  since  1789,  and  on  the  notes 


LOSSES   FROM   BANKS  AND   BANK-PAPER.  443 

taken  for  balances  and  deposites  during  those  suspen- 
sions, is  thus  computed  at  ....         142,500,000 

6.  But  it  may  be  considered  a  set-off,  or  proper  deduc- 
tion from  the  above  losses  by  depreciation  on  notes, 
that  when  the  banks  are  preparing  to  resume,  and  do 
resume,  the  notes  rise  gradually  in  the  market  to  a 
value  at  par  with  specie,  and  that,  by  this,  some  por- 
tions of  the  community  gain  an  amount  equal  to  the 
original  depreciation  or  loss  per  dollar  ;  as  more  mer- 
chandise or  produce  can  usually  be  bought  with  the 
notes,  or  more  debts  paid  with  them  to  creditors  who 
insisted  on  specie  or  its  equivalent.  This  is  true,  fre- 
quently. But,  as  the  same  persons  who  held  the 
notes  when  the  banks  suspended,  or  when  paid  out 
for  deposites  and  balances,  seldom  retain  them  till  the 
banks  resume,  and  the  original  holder  often  suffers  as 
much  as  if  the  banks  did  not  resume,  —  and  as  the 
amount  of  notes  out  when  they  rise  in  value,  and  the 
banks  resume,  is  usually  much  reduced, — the  deduc- 
tion on  this  account  to  the  people  at  large  should  not 
be  over  one-third  of  the  estimate  of  the  former  losses. 
Thus,  from  1815  to  1819,  the  circulation  out  was 
reduced  nearly  one-third ;  and  from  1837  to  1838-39, 
nearly  one-third.  (See  Table  E,  and  Treasury  Bank 
Beport  for  1838-39.)  Supposing,  then,  that  only 
two-thirds  as  many  notes  remained  abroad  when  the 
banks  resumed  as  were  out  when  the  banks  sus- 
pended, and  that  half  of  this  was  in  the  hands  of  orig- 
inal holders  then,  or  during  the  rise,  and  the  deduc- 
tion should  be  equal  to 47,500,000 

[This  includes  an  early  resumption  by  all  the  banks 
now  suspended,  and  makes  a  liberal  allowance  for  the 
whole  rise  or  benefit  by  that.] 

7.  This  would  leave  a  net  loss  to  the  community  of 
depreciated  paper,  in  cases  of  suspension  by  banks 

since  1789,  equal  to  .....       $95,000,000 

[Before  these  tables  were  completed,  only  a  portion  of  the  banks 
that  suspended  in  1839  resumed,  and  several  of  those  which  resumed 
suspended  again  after  a  few  days.  Deducting  from  the  set-off  a  proper 
sum  for  those  banks  which  have  not  resumed,  and  adding  enough  for 
this  third  suspension,  and  the  aggregate  loss  should  probably  be  sev- 
eral millions  more.] 

[There  is  another  injury  to  the  public,  of  a  pecuniary  character, 
during  any  long  suspension  of  banks,  such  as  from  1814  to  1817.  It 
arises  from  an  expansion  of  the  circulation,  the  check  of  paying  specie 


444  LOSSES  FROM   BANKS  AND   BANK-PAPER. 

being  removed :  and  from  a  nominal  rise  of  prices,  and  an  increased 
expense  to  all  living  on  fixed  salaries,  rents,  annuities,  &c,  without 
any  equivalent  in  return.  (See  Raguet  on  Currency,  160th  page,  on 
this,  and  other  evils  from  this  cause,  which  cannot  be  computed  in  any 
tabular  form  with  aocuracy.)  They  may  and  will  be  more  properly 
considered  further  under  Table  B  5,  and  its  notes.] 


B  4. 

Loss  or  Destruction  of  Bank-notes  since  1789,  by  Accidents,  fyc. 

1.    In  1811,  the  whole  amount  of  bank-notes  out  was 

about $36,000,000 

[See  Table  of  circulation  and  currency,  E.] 

But  the  average  amount,  during  the  previous  period  since 
1789,  had  probably  not  exceeded  two-thirds  of  this 
sum,  or $24,000,000 

The  loss  on  that,  estimated  at  four  per  cent.,  would  be         $960,000 

[Where  banks  issue  no  notes  under  ten  dollars,  it  is  believed  that, 
on  their  average  circulation  during  twenty  years,  the  loss  or  destruc- 
tion of  notes  may  fairly  be  computed  at  about  three  per  cent. 

The  first  United  States  Bank  issued  no  notes  under  ten  dollars  ; 
and  at  the  close  of  its  charter,  in  1811,  the  circulation  outstanding  was 
$6,552,791, — probably  not  far  from  the  average  since  1791.  Of  that 
amount  there  remained  unredeemed  in  1822  (doubtless  mostly  lost) 
$203,591,  or  three  and  one-tenth  per  cent.     (See  report  below.) 

The  second  Bank  of  the  United  States  issued  notes  of  a  similar 
denomination,  with  some  five-dollar  checks  or  drafts  after  1825  ;  and 
the  commissioners  to  adjust  its  affairs  with  the  government  estimated 
the  loss  at  $600,000,  or  three  per  cent,  on  its  circulation.  (See  their 
report  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  p.  14,  Doc.  118  House  of 
Reps.,  Jan.  30,  1837.) 

Few  banks  in  the  United  States  issued  notes  under  five  dollars 
before  1811,  except  in  New  England  (Raguet  on  Currency,  p.  137) ; 
but  most  of  them  issued  notes  under  ten  dollars  ;  and  the  amount  of 
five-dollar  notes,  when  issued,  usually  equals  one-fourth  of  the  whole 
circulation ;  and  those  under  five,  one-fourth  more.  Add  for  these 
two  causes  before  1811  only  one  per  cent.,  making  an  average  loss 
of  four  per  cent.,  and  the  result  would  be  as  before  computed.] 

2.  Since  1811  it  is  believed  that  quite  three-fourths  of  the  banks 
have  issued  notes  under  five  dollars ;  and  most  of  them,  with  the 
exception  before  named,  as  low  as  five.      The  loss,  in  cases  of  issues 


LOSSES   FROM   BANKS  AND   BANK-PAPER.  445 

under  five  dollars,  is  often  computed  at  ten  per  cent,  on  the  whole. 
But  considering  it  to  be  only  six  per  cent.,  or  double  the  amount  it  is 
when  the  issues  are  not  under  ten  dollars,  and  the  result  will  be  as 
follows  : 

In  1830  the  whole  bank  circulation  out  was,  by  the  small- 
est estimate  (see  Table  E),  .    '     .         .         $64,000,000 

Compute,  as  before,  that  this  had  been,  during  the  nine- 
teen or  twenty  years  previous,  on  an  average,  two- 
thirds  as  much,  or $42,666,666 

The  loss  on  one-fourth  of  this,  at  four  per  cent.,  would  be  $426,666 
On  the  other  three-fourths,  at  six  per  cent.,      .         .  1,920,000 

Aggregate  from  1811  to  1830,       ....         $2,346,666 

3.    In  1840  the  whole  bank  circulation  out  was  not  far 

from $106,000,000 

[See  Treasury  Bank  Report,  and  Table  E.] 

As  this  period  is  only  half  as  long,  the  loss,  at  half  the 
former  rates,  on  two- thirds  of  this  (the  average  amount 
during  the  ten  years),  would  be  $3,814,666 

Summary  of  these  Losses. 

Before  1811, $960,000 

From  1811  to  1830, 2,346,666 

From  1830  to  1840, 3,814,666 

$7,121,332 

[If  it  be  computed  that  this  loss  by  paper  is  quite  double  the  loss 
which  would  have  been  sustained  on  a  like  amount  of  coin  in  circula- 
tion,—  as  the  latter  is  more  durable,  not  much  injured  by  fires,  and  in 
general  guarded  with  more  care, —  and  the  greater  loss  to  the  commu- 
nity, by  the  destruction  of  bank-notes,  would  probably  be  about 
$3,560,666. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  advantages  in  the  use  of  paper,  by  cheapness 
and  ease  of  transportation,  and  the  saving  of  metal  from  wear,  are 
considerable ;  but,  being  not  included  in  the  resolution,  are  conse- 
quently, as  before  suggested,  not  attempted  to  be  computed  here,  or 
in  the  other  tables.] 

38 


446  LOSSES  FROM  BANKS  AND  BANK-PAPER. 


B  5. 

Aggregate  of  Losses  since  1789,  to  the  People,  through  the  Exist- 
ence of  Banks  and  the  Use  of  Bank-paper. 

1.  Losses  through  banks  that  have  failed  since  1789,  on 
their  capital,  circulation,  deposites,  and  bank  balances 

(see  Table  B  2), $108,885,721 

2.  Losses  by  depreciation  on  bank-notes,  through  sus- 
pensions of  specie  payments  by  banks  (see  B  3),  .       $95,000,000 

[See  note  to  seventh  head  of  B  3,  from  which  it  is  probable  that 
these  two  items  should  be  increased,  by  events  within  a  few  days,  at 
least  several  millions.] 

3.  Losses  by  destruction  of  bank-notes,  which  some  may 
think  should  be  added,  but  which  in  its  full  extent  is 

doubtful  (see  B  4), $7,121,332 

4.  The  losses  on  counterfeit  notes  are  not  specifically 
called  for  in  the  resolution.  But,  to  the  extent  that 
they  are  greater  than  the  losses  by  counterfeit  coin, 
they  are  an  incident  to  "the  existence  of  banks  and 
the  use  of  bank-paper,"  and  should  therefore  be 
included.  They  have  been  large,  and  it  is  believed 
quite  double  those  on  coin  in  circulation,  in  a  ratio  to 
the  amount  of  each.  Sufficient  data  on  this  point  are 
not  possessed  to  justify  any  very  accurate  tabular 
statement  as  to  the  amount ;  but,  on  the  above  basis, 
the  losses  by  counterfeit  notes,  more  than  on  coin,  are 
computed  to  have  been $4,444,444 

[In  1839,  it  seems  that  Bicknell  had  ascertained  that  counterfeit 
notes  were  then  in  circulation  on  two  hundred  and  fifty-four  different 
banks,  and  of  thirteen  hundred  and  ninety-five  different  descriptions, 
from  denominations  of  one  to  five  hundred  dollars.  (See  Raguet  on 
Currency  and  Banking,  p.  174.)  In  England,  the  losses  by  forgeries 
of  bank-paper  have  probably  not  been  so  large,  in  proportion,  as  in 
this  country ;  as  the  notes  which  circulate  there  are  of  larger  denomi- 
nations, and  are  in  the  hands  of  the  more  intelligent  portions  of  the 
community.  The  same  note,  it  is  believed,  is  issued  only  once  there, 
which  would  be  a  check  on  forgery.  The  Bank  of  England,  for  four 
or  five  years,  ascertained  not  over  $15,000  yearly  of  its  notes  that 
had  been  forged.  (See  report  of  committee  on  renewing  its  charter 
in  1832 ;  Appendix,  p.  55.)  Probably  many  more  counterfeits  were 
in  circulation,  that  did  not  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  bank ;  sup- 
pose a  like  sum,  making  $30,000  of  the  Bank  of  England.     Suppose 


LOSSES  FROM   BANKS  AND   BANK- PAPER.  447 

that  a  like  sum  was  lost  there  yearly,  by  forgeries  of  notes  of  private 
and  joint-stock  banks,  which  would  make  in  England  an  aggregate  of 
$60,000  yearly.  In  the  United  States,  smaller  notes  being  so  much 
more  used,  and  especially  by  the  less  informed,  the  latter  are  much 
more  defrauded  by  counterfeits  than  in  England.  Suppose  it  to  be 
quite  three  times  more ;  and  hence  that  the  average  loss  here,  by 
counterfeit  notes,  has  always  been  as  much  as  one  cent  per  head  yearly 
to  our  population.  Some  estimate  it  as  high  as  half  a  dollar  per  head. 
But,  at  that  rate,  the  result  would  be  enormous.  Thus,  supposing  that 
half  a  dollar  per  head  of  our  population  has  been  lost  yearly  by  coun- 
terfeits of  bank-paper,  and  that  only  one- fourth  of  a  dollar  would 
have  been  lost  by  a  currency  of  coin  to  the  same  amount,  and  the 
result  of  the  mere  excess  of  loss  by  bank-paper  would  be  this  : 

From  1790  to  1810  : 

(The  average  population  is  presumed  to  be  that  of  1800.) 

From  1790  to  1810,  yearly,  at  one-fourth  of  a  dollar, 

$1,326,487;  for  twenty  years,         .         .         .  $26,529,740 

From  1810  to  1830  : 

The  average  population  as  1820,  at  one-fourth  of  a  dol- 
lar, $2,409,533  yearly,  and  for  twenty  years,         .       48,190,660 

From  1830  to  1840  : 

The  average  population  at  fifteen  millions,  at  one-fourth 

of  a  dollar,  $3,750,000  yearly,  and  for  ten  years,  .       37,500,000 

Aggregate  loss  since  1789,  by  counterfeits  of  bank- 
notes, beyond  what  would  have  been  the  loss  on  so 
much  coin,  at  one-fourth  of  a  dollar  per  head,  .  $112,220,400 

But,  at  only  one  cent  per  head  (which  is  probably  within  the  truth, 
as  it  would  be,  on  an  average  of  ten  persons,  a  loss  of  only  one  dollar 
in  ten  years),  the  result  would  be  one-twenty-fifth  of  the  above  aggre- 
gate since  1789,  or  $4,444,444. 

5.  As  this  branch  of  the  resolution  is  very  comprehensive,  and  calls 
for  all  lost  "  by  the  existence  of  banks,  and  the  use  of  banking 
institutions  generally,"  as  well  as  for  specific  losses,  from  certain 
causes  particularly  designated,  it  will  be  necessary  to  proceed  further, 
and  consider  the  other  injuries  that  are  supposed  to  have  resulted  from 
the  existence  of  those  institutions. 

The  rate  of  interest  in  the  money  market  is  believed  to  have  been 
enhanced  by  the  use  or  existence  of  banks,  and  in  that  way  loss  may 
have  been  sustained,  or  increased  payments  made,  on  account  of  the 
system;  and  also  from  the  premium  almost  uniformly  charged  by 
brokers  for  exchanging  uncurrent  notes  of  distant  banks  that  still  pay 
specie.  (Gouge  on  Banking,  p.  90.)  Banks,  as  chartered  and  man- 
aged usually  in  this  country,  have  led  to  still  greater  losses,  which  it 
would  be  even  more  difficult  to  estimate  in  anything  like  accurate 
amounts;    but  which  arise  from  the  improvident  engagements   and 


448  LOSSES   FROM   BANKS  AND   BANK-PAPER. 

enterprises  into  which  individual  States  and  corporations  are  tempted  in 
this  system  of  banking,  by  the  facility  not  only  of  creating  bank  cap- 
ital by  promissory  notes,  but  the  measure  of  value  at  pleasure  by  bank 
notes.  (Gouge  on  Banking,  pp.  89,  90,  and  39.)  Prices  are  raised 
at  will,  by  suddenly  making  currency  plentiful.  Thousands,  seeing 
the  enhancement,  purchase  property,  under  the  assurance  of  enriching 
themselves  by  higher  prices,  and  increase  their  current  expenses  into 
wasteful  extravagance.  (Tucker  on  Banking,  p.  189.)  All  at  once 
the  flood  recedes.  Engagements  cannot  be  met,  but  by  sacrifices, 
which  not  only  take  away  all  the  profits,  but  the  property  previously 
acquired.  Schemes  of  relief  succeed,  tenfold  more  destructive  than 
the  original  schemes.  Prices  of  real  estate  are  to  be  sustained  by 
improvements  made  by  States  or  corporations,  in  roads,  canals,  &c, 
often  without  any  real  advantage  but  to  the  speculative  holder  of  prop- 
erty, and  often  with  a  total  loss  of  the  money  expended  by  the  public. 
Elections  are  made  to  turn  upon  relief  questions.  Finally,  it  some- 
times becomes  a  contest  between  the  ruined  and  the  solvent  portions 
of  the  community,  in  which  the  most  desperate  are  the  most  likely  to 
prevail. 

Two  or  three  of  the  above  general  items  of  loss  have  alone  been 
computed  to  be  annually  quite  $7,500,000.  (See  Raguet  on  Cur- 
rency, page  174.)  The  above  sum,  on  an  average  for  only  twenty 
years  of  the  period  since  1789,  and  nothing  for  the  other  thirty,  would 
equal  $150,000,000 

If  all  the  items  were  included,  and  could  be  reduced  to  figures,  the 
amount  would  be  almost  incredible. 

While  the  present  banking  system  exists,  allowing  so  extensively 
banks  of  issue,  it  will  continue  to  happen,  as  has  been  the  case  hereto- 
fore, that  fictitious  banks  and  their  paper  will  be  got  up,  without  any 
charters  whatever ;  and  the  community  at  a  distance  be  thus  frequently 
swindled  out  of  large  sums,  whose  amount  it  is  difficult  to  compute. 
So  all  the  frauds,  robberies,  and  defalcations,  connected  with  the 
banks,  and  for  which  banks  give  peculiar  facilities,  may,  in  a  great 
degree,  be  proper  charges  on  the  system. 

Summary. 

1.  Losses  by  bank  failures,         ....  $108,885,721 

2.  Losses  by  suspensions  of  specie  payments  by  banks, 

and  consequent  depreciation  on  their  notes,    .  95,000,000 

3.  Losses  by  destruction  of  bank-notes  by  accidents,  7,121,332 

4.  Losses  by  counterfeit  bank-notes,  beyond  losses  by  coin,    4,444,444 

5.  Losses   by  fluctuations  in   bank  currency  affecting 

prices,  extravagance  in  living,  sacrifices  of  property, 
and  by  only  a  part  of  the  other  incidents  to  the 
banking  system,  not  computed  above,  at  least  150.000,000 

Aggregate  computed, $365,451,497 


LOSSES  FROM   BANKS   AND   BANK-PAPER. 


449 


C. 

Amount  paid  by  the  Community  to  the  Banks,  annually,  the  last 
Ten  Years,  for  the  use  of  Banking  Institutions. 

1.  The  resolution  calls  for  the  sums  thus  paid,  whether  "  directly  or 
indirectly,"  and  whether  by  "the  people  or  the  government." 

It  may  be,  therefore,  that  the  amount  collected  by  banks  from  the 
community,  annually,  for  interest,  exchanges,  rents,  &c,  ought,  in  the 
opinion  of  many,  to  be  considered  as  what  is  paid  to  them  "for  the 
use  of  banking  institutions."  Consequently,  an  attempt  has  been 
made,  first,  to  form  some  estimate  of  this  amount,  which  shall  approx- 
imate the  truth. 

The  result  has  been,  that  the  whole  payments  made  to  the  banks  for 
the  use  of  them,  their  capital,  &c,  during  the  last  ten  years,  has  been 
in  the  aggregate         .         .         .         .   '     .         .         $282,000,000 


Tins  would  be  annually,  on  an  average, 


$28,200,000 


To  explain  the  amount  thus  received  by  banks  annually,  during  the 
last  ten  years,  the  following  data  are  submitted : 

The  aggregate  capital  and  discounts  of  all  banks  in  the  United 
States,  during  that  period,  so  far  as  can  be  ascertained  from  the 
treasury  reports  on  banks,  and  some  estimates,  have  been  as  follows  : 


Aggregate  capital. 

1  Aggregate  discounts  or 
1                  loans. 

In  1831  

Not  ascertained 
Do. 
Do. 

$200,005,944 
231,250,337 
251,875,292 
290,772,091 
317,636,778 
327,132,512 
358,442,692 

In  1832  

Do 

In  1833 

Do 

In  1834  

$324,119,499 
365,163,834 
457,506,080 
525,115,702 
485,631,687 
492,278,015 
462,896,523 

In  1835 

In  1836 

In  1837  

In  1838  

In  1839  

In  1840  

[In  1830,  $145,192,268  as  capital,  and  $200,451,214  as  dis- 
counts or  loans,  have  been  ascertained  and  computed  by  Mr.  Gallatin, 
in  his  Considerations  on  the  Currency.] 

[The  above  amounts  stated  as  the  capital  employed  in  banking 
require  some  explanation.  It  has  been  the  practice,  in  most  parts  of 
the  country,  to  put  banks  into  operation  chiefly  upon  the  stock-notes 
of  the  proprietors.  By  the  reports  of  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts, 
in  1838,  it  appears  that  many  of  the  banks  in  that  State,  which  are 
generally  as  safe  as  any  in  the  Union,  have  been  put  into  operation 
upon  the  naked  promissory  notes  of  the  stockholders,  with  little  actual 
capital,  excepting  that  which  has  accumulated  from  the  operations  of 
the  banks.  These  promissory  notes  are  the  principal  basis  of  the 
paper  currency  issued  in  the  first  instance.  If  confidence  should  hap- 
38* 


450  LOSSES   FROM  BANKS  AND   BANK-PAPER. 

pen  to  be  buoyant  for  a  succession  of  years,  the  interest  on  this  cur- 
rency, paid  in  advance,  compounded  as  it  always  is  at  short  periods, 
soon  enables  the  stock-notes  to  be  withdrawn,  without  the  application 
of  any  capital  whatever,  by  the  original  stockholders.  On  the  other 
hand,  should  a  previous  general  inflation  give  rise  to  a  demand  for 
specie  for  exportation,  in  the  early  stages  of  any  new  bank,  or  where 
the  stockholders  have  applied  the  dividends  to  other  purposes,  it 
explodes,  and  the  community  generally  lose  the  greater  part  of  the 
circulation  out  at  the  time.  (See  Ragueton  Currency  and  Banking,  p. 
115  ;  Tucker  on  Money,  p.  409  ;  Gouge  on  Banking,  part  1st,  p.  137.) 
But  in  these  tables  I  am  compelled  to  make  the  computation  as  to 
capital  as  if  it  was  all  real  and  paid  in  (so  far  as  returned  paid  in),  on 
account  of  the  difficulty  in  discriminating  the  amount  that  is  factitious 
from  what  is  not  so.  But  I  do  not  consider  anything  as  capital  which 
is  merely  authorized,  and  not  returned  as  paid  in.] 

Estimated  average  bank  capital,  yearly,  from  1830  to 

1840,         . $235,000,000 

Estimated  average  discounts  or  loans,  yearly,  from  1830 
to  1840,  $370,000,000 

The  loans  have,  in  some  years,  been  nearly  double  the  amount  of 
the  nominal  capital  in  the  whole  Union.  Thus,  in  1838,  they  were 
one  hundred  and  eighty  per  cent,  on  it,  and  in  ten  States  exceeded 
two  hundred  per  cent.  In  scarcely  any  State  is  it  believed  that  they 
are,  by  law,  limited  below  that  rate,  and  sometimes  they  are  limited  in 
their  charters  at  only  three  times  the  amount  of  capital.  (Gouge  on 
Banking,  part  1st,  page  51.) 

As  the  income  or  gross  profits  are  derived,  not  only  from  loans  of 
the  capital,  deposites,  and  circulation,  over  and  above  the  specie  on 
hand,  but  from  exchanges,  and  a  larger  interest  than  six  per  cent,  in 
all  cases,  by  the  mode  of  computing  and  paying  it  (and,  in  several 
States,  from  seven  to  nine  per  cent,  permitted  by  law),  it  is  supposed 
that  the  annual  gross  income  must  average  twelve  per  cent,  on  the 
capital.  This  would  be,  as  before  stated,  in  the  last  ten  years,  annu- 
ally,          $28,200,000 

Or,  for  the  whole  period, 282,000,000 

2.  But  it  might  be  proper  to  regard  as  paid  to  banks,  for  the  use 
of  banking  institutions,  not  the  whole  of  their  gross  revenue,  but  only 
the  net  income  collected  by  banks  over  six  per  cent,  on  their  capital. 
The  six  per  cent,  interest  on  the  capital  may  be  considered  as  paid  for 
the  use  of  money  they  originally  possessed,  rather  than  for  the  use  of 
banking  institutions.     The  aggregate  paid  them  for  the  latter  alone, 
for  the  ten  years,  would,  on  this  hypothesis,  be  but  half  the  former 
amount,  or         ......  $141,000,000 

And  the  sum  annually  but 14,100,000 

Again :  if  the  expenses  of  managing  the  actual  capital  were  also 


LOSSES   FROM   BANKS  AND   BANK-PAPER.  451 

deducted,  besides  six  per  cent,  interest  on  it  (which  some  might 
expect,  but  which  is  hardly  deemed  proper  in  the  present  calculations, 
as  the  expenses  are  an  incident  to  the  use  of  banking  institutions),  the 
result  would  be  as  follows : 

It  is  computed  that,  on  an  average,  in  the  United  States,  two  per 
cent,  on  the  capital  will  pay  all  necessary  expenses.  (Tucker  on 
Money,  &c,  pp.  172,  369.)  The  expenses  of  the  second  United 
States  Bank  were  only  one  per  cent,  on  its  capital ;  the  latter  was  so 
large.  One  per  cent,  is  enough,  if  the  capital  be  a  million  only 
(Raguet  on  Currency,  p.  89) ;  or,  indeed,  if  only  $250,000  (p.  72). 
This  would  leave  four  per  cent,  net  receipts  beyond  the  reasonable 
expenses,  and  six  per  cent,  on  the  capital,  or  yearly  $9,400,000 

During  the  ten  years  it  would  amount  to         .         .      94,000,000 

[If  only  five  per  cent,  was  deemed  a  fair  interest,  as  some  seem  to 
suppose  (Raguet  on  Currency,  p.  170),  the  net  income  would  be,  of 
course,  higher.  The  first  United  States  Bank  made,  besides  expenses 
and  six  per  cent,  on  its  capital,  two  and  two-thirds  per  cent,  net  profits. 
(Tucker  on  Money  and  Banking,  p.  360.)  It  sometimes  divided  ten 
per  cent.,  and  never  less  than  seven  and  a  half  per  cent.  (Seybert, 
520;  Gouge  on  Banking,  part  2d,  p.  51,  note.)  Had  it  dealt  in 
exchanges,  which  was  not  the  case,  to  any  great  extent,  and  charged 
more  than  six  per  cent,  interest,  the  profits  would  probably  have  been 
much  larger.  But  Mr.  Raguet  thinks  that  if  the  delay  in  receiving 
back  the  capital  is  considered,  the  profits  (2d  vol.  of  his  Exam.,  p.  78) 
were  not  more  than  par.  In  the  Merchants'  Magazine  for  June,  1840, 
it  is  stated  that  banks  often  make  ten  per  cent,  profits  on  their  capital. 
(See,  also,  Raguet  on  Currency,  p.  171 ;  and  Tucker  on  Money,  pp. 
175-7,  on  this  subject;  Gouge  on  Banking,  p.  88.) 

But  a  considerable  portion  of  the  capital,  as  before  explained,  is 
frequently  not  paid  in,  which  would  greatly  increase  the  profits  in 
such  cases.  (Raguet  on  Currency,  p.  115 ;  Gouge  on  Banking,  pp. 
155,  88,  137,  part  2d,  p.  57;  Tucker,  pp.  365-9.)  And  the  net 
gain,  annually,  has  sometimes  been  computed  higher  than  four  per 
cent,  on  the  nominal  capital,  or  a  gross  income  on  it  of  ten  per  cent. 
(Tucker  on  Money,  pp.  263,  264  ;  Gouge  on  Banking,  1st  part,  p. 
70.)  On  the  other  hand,  Mr.  Gallatin  appears  to  consider  it  as 
usually  less,  though  he  adds  nothing  for  profits  on  exchanges,  or  for  a 
higher  interest  than  six  per  cent.  So  the  average  dividends  indicate  a 
less  gain,  as  they  do  not  equal  in  the  United  States  over  nine  per 
cent.  (See  Treasury  Bank  Reports;  and  Tucker,  p.  411.)  But  it 
must  be  remembered  that  they  sometimes  reach  twelve  and  fifteen  per 
cent.  (Gouge  on  Banking,  part  2d,  p.  51,  note.)  And,  besides  the 
dividends  made,  something  is  often  reserved  from  the  profits,  and  kept 
on  hand,  and  small  individual  balances  and  some  dividends  are  never 
claimed,  and  thus,  in  the  end,  increase  the  gains  of  the  bank. 

The  amount  collected  from  the  community  would,  also,  often  yield 
a  larger  dividend,  if  the  salaries  to  officers,  who  are  frequently  stock- 


452  LOSSES  FROM  BANKS  AND   BANK-PAPER. 

holders  or  relatives,  were  not  too  high,  and  much  lost  by  imprudent 
loans  to  some  of  the  officers  and  stockholders.  It  is  an  evidence  of  the 
uncertainty  of  computations  on  this  subject,  that  Raguet  and  Tucker 
differ  nearly  forty  millions  as  to  the  amount  on  which  banks  gain,  or 
receive  an  interest  beyond  their  capital.   (Tucker,  p.  175;  Raguet, 

p.  171.)] 

3.  In  conclusion,  it  may  be  proper  to  add,  that  if  we  regard  the 
amount  collected  from  the  community  by  the  banks  to  be  nearly  what 
I  have  computed  it,  and  also  regard  the  whole,  beyond  interest  on 
their  capital,  or  beyond  that  and  fair  expenses,  to  be  the  amount  paid  to 
the  banks  for  the  use  of  banking  institutions,  it  is  not  material  to  the 
inquiry  what  may  be  afterwards  done  with  the  money.  Nor  may  it 
be  proper  to  regard  it  at  all  as  an  actual  loss  or  injury  to  the  commu- 
nity ;  because  the  borrower  obtains,  in  the  shape  of  notes,  the  use  of  the 
bank  credit,  or  its  guaranty  for  the  whole,  instead  of  specie.  Indeed, 
it  is  considered  by  some  as  the  great  advantage  of  banks,  that  this 
credit  can  be  loaned  out  as  a  substitute  for  actual  capital  and  coin. 
(Raguet,  p.  168 ;  Tucker  on  Money,  p.  175 ;  McCulloch's  Diction- 
ary, p.  65.)  But  one  evil  in  this  is,  that  the  banks  are  enabled  to 
loan  their  credit  or  guaranty,  and  to  profit  by  them,  through  privi- 
leges of  this  and  other  kinds,  in  which  all  the  community  do  not  partic- 
ipate. One  of  the  other  privileges,  sometimes,  is  an  almost  exclusive 
system  of  loans  to  the  stockholders,  officers,  and  their  friends.  (Gouge 
on  Banking,  p.  89 ;  ib.,  part  2,  p.  52.)  Another  great  evil  is,  that 
this  is  done  through  a  system  of  banking  which  leads  to  losses ;  such 
as  depreciation  on  the  notes,  total  failure  of  banks,  fluctuation  in 
prices,  &c.  &c,  that  injure  the  people  at  large  in  the  manner  and  to 
the  extent  illustrated  in  some  of  the  other  tabular  statements  before 
submitted. 

Thus,  of  the  aggregate  losses  since  1789,  computed  in 
the  previous  statements,  there  must,  on  an  analysis  of 
them,  be  considered  to  have  happened  within  the  last 
ten  years  at  least  .         .         .         .         .         $200,000,000 

Or,  annually  (see  A,  and  B  5),  .         .         .         .  20,000,000 

[Considering  recent  events,  referred  to  in  B  2  and  B  5,  this  esti- 
mate for  the  last  ten  years  will  probably  be  found  not  too  large.] 


D. 
Whole  Bank  Capital  in  the  United  States  owned  abroad. 

1.    Amount  of  capital  in  the  United  States  Bank,  in 

1832,  owned  abroad,  84,055  shares,    .         .         .         $8,405,500 
[See  Senate  document  (No.  31)  of  January  23,  1832.] 

This  is  nearly  one-fourth  of  the  whole  of  its  capital.     It 


LOSSES   FROM    BANKS   AND    BANK-PAPER.  453 

was  owned  by  about  480  different  persons.  By  a 
report  of  the  bank,  January  30,  1840  (Doc.  172, 
House  of  Rep.),  there  were  then  1390  foreign  stock- 
holders; which,  if  they  held  the  same  number  of 
shares  each,  would  require,  by  estimate,  to  be  added 
since,  from  the  sale  of  the  seven  millions  of  stock 
once  owned  by  the  United  States,  and  otherwise, 
about 16,000,000 


Thus,  there  is  owned  abroad,  in  the  aggregate,  in  United 

States  Bank,  as  estimated  at  this  time  *     .         .         $24,405,500 

2.  In  the  United  States,  generally,  not  much  bank  stock  is  sup- 
posed to  be  owned  abroad,  out  of  the  cities  of  New  York,  Philadel- 
phia, Baltimore,  and  New  Orleans. 

The  bank  capital  in  those  cities,  in  1839  and  1840, 
excluding  the  Bank  of  the  United  States,  averaged 
about $90,000,000 

Computing  that  only  about  one-third  as  much  of  this  was 
owned  abroad  as  of  the  United  States  Bank  stock  in 
1832,  or  only  one-ninth  as  much  as  now,  and  it  would 
be 7,500,000 

Add  only  one-half  of  this  last  sum,  for  all  the  rest  of  the 

bank  stock  in  the  United  States  owned  abroad,        .         3,750,000 

The  result  would  then  be  as  follows : 

3.  {Summary.)  —  In  United  States  Bank,        .         $24,405,500 

In  the  four  cities,  excluding  U. 

S.  Bank,    ....         7,500,000 
In  the  rest  of  the  country,        .         3,750,000 


Aggregate  in  the  United  States  owned  abroad,    .         $35,655,500 


[For  Table  E,  see  Appendix  V.] 


*  Some  think  that  more  than  seven  out  of  the  ten  millions  of  the  stock  of  the  first 
Bank  of  the  United  States  was  owned  abroad,  when  its  charter  expired  in  1811. 
(Gallatin  on  Banks  and  Currency,  p.  44.)     This  is  about  the  same  proportion. 


454  SPIRIT   RATIONS,    AND   WHIPPING  IN   THE   NAVY. 


SUBSTITUTE  FOR  SPIRIT  RATIONS  AND  FOR  WHIPPING 
IN  THE  NAVY.* 


Circulars  respecting  the  Commutation  of  the  Spirit  Part  of  the 
Navy  Rations,  Assistance  to  Vessels  in  Distress,  and  Punish- 
ments in  the  Service. 

Navy  Department,  15th  June,  1831. 

All  persons  in  the  naval  service,  entitled  to  rations,  who  shall  vol- 
untarily relinquish  the  use  of  that  part  of  them  composed  of  spirits, 
shall  be  paid  therefor  at  the  rate  of  six  cents  per  ration,  it  being  the 
estimated  value  of  that  part,  as  approved  by  this  department,  Septem- 
ber 17,  1817. 

The  payments  made  in  pursuance  of  this  regulation  are  to  be 
charged  to  the  appropriation  for  "provisions." 

LEVI  WOODBURY. 

Navy  Department,  26th  September,  1831. 

Sir  :  In  consequence  of  recent  occurrences  in  the  service,  your 
attention  is  invited  to  two  subjects,  where  the  laws  now  regulate  the 
rights  and  power  of  all  concerned,  but  where  there  is  still  vested  in 
officers  a  discretion,  in  the  exercise  of  which,  it  may  be  desirable  to 
them  to  know  distinctly  the  wishes  of  the  President  and  of  tins  depart- 
ment. 

One  of  those  subjects  and  our  wishes  upon  it  are,  that  when  any 
portion  of  the  navy  furnishes  relief  to  American  vessels,  whether 
wrecked  or  otherwise  in  distress,  to  yield  which  relief  promptly  ought 
to  be,  and  long  has  been,  one  great  object  of  its  gallant  exertions,  no 
compensation  of  any  kind  should  either  be  asked  or  received. 

The  other  subject  and  our  wishes  upon  it  are,  that  till  Congress 
deem  it  proper  to  alter  the  existing  laws  concerning  punishments  in 
the  navy,  and  whenever  those  laws  allow  a  discretion  in  the  choice  of 
punishments,  the  first  resort,  in  the  case  of  offences  by  seamen,  is 
recommended  to  be  always  had  to  pecuniary  fines,  badges  of  disgrace, 
and  other  mild  corrections,  rather  than  to  the  humiliating  practice  of 
whipping ;  and  that  never  on  the  same  day,  by  punishing,  under  an 
officer's  own  authority,  two  offences  at  once,  should  the  stripes  limited 
by  law  be  exceeded  in  number,  or  be  inflicted  otherwise  than  in  the 
presence  and  under  the  sanction  of  the  commanding  officer  of  the 
vessel  or  station. 

*  Report  of  the  Navy  Department,  allowing  a  substitute  for  the  spirit  part  of  the 
ration,  and  urging  the  use  of  other  punishments  instead  of  whipping. 


BREAKWATER  AT  THE  MOUTH  OF  DELAWARE  BAY.     455 

And  that,  in  the  case  of  offences  by  officers,  which  it  is  hoped  their 
well-known  high  sense  of  duty  and  honor  will  prevent  from  becoming 
frequent,  a  system  more  remedial  should  be  adopted,  by  sentencing  to 
a  reduction  of  rank  and  pay,  or  to  suspension  from  promotion,  rather 
than  to  suspension  from  active  service ;  as  persons  unfortunately 
guilty  of  any  misbehavior  need  most  the  constant  discipline  of  active 
service,  and,  when  suspended  therefrom,  are  left  without  employment, 
under  greater  temptations  and  opportunities  for  injurious  indulgences. 

LEVI  WOODBURY. 

To  all  Captains  and 

Masters  Commandant  Navy  U.  States. 


BREAKWATER  AT  THE  MOUTH  OF  DELAWARE  BAY.* 


The  subject  of  said  memorial  is  of  a  character  deserving  the  most 
full  and  careful  consideration.  It  interests  immediately  and  deeply 
almost  the  whole  commerce  of  three  Atlantic  States ;  it  is  important 
to  much  of  the  coasting  trade  of  the  Union ;  and  has  a  material  bear- 
ing upon  the  security  of  our  navy,  and  upon  the  great  maritime 
defences  of  the  country.  Hence,  during  five  years  past,  the  attention 
of  Congress  has,  in  various  ways,  been  invoked  and  devoted  to  the 
examination  of  this  measure.  As  early  as  May  9th,  1822,  an  act 
passed,  making  an  appropriation  of  $22,000  for  the  erection  of  wooden 
piers  near  Cape  Henlopen,  at  the  mouth  of  Delaware  Bay,  provided 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  on  a  survey  of  that  part  of  the  coast, 
should  be  satisfied  of  their  utility  and  expediency.  But  the  survey 
rendered  it  apparent,  that  works  more  extensive,  such  as  a  break- 
water, or  artificial  harbor,  and  those  formed  of  the  most  durable 
materials,  would  combine  advantages  more  numerous,  and  in  their 
value  be  much  more  than  commensurate  with  the  increased  expense. 
Consequently,  this  appropriation  was  never  carried  into  effect ;  but  in 
June,  A.  D.  1823,  pursuing  the  new  light  which  had  been  cast  upon  the 
subject  by  the  partial  survey,  and  yielding  to  the  suggestions  of  a 

*  A  Report  made  to  the  Senate  of  the  United  States,  January  3,  1827,  in  favor  of 
the  Delaware  Breakwater. 


456     BREAKWATER  AT  THE  MOUTH  OF  DELAWARE  BAY. 

policy  enlarged  and  liberal,  the  proper  authorities  instructed  the  board 
of  engineers  to  make  an  examination  into  the  practicability  and  useful- 
ness of  such  works  as  are  now  prayed  for  in  the  memorial ;  and  if  the 
result  should  prove  satisfactory,  to  recommend  a  plan  for  their  erec- 
tion, and  furnish  a  detailed  estimate  of  their  expense.  Their  report 
of  July  14,  1823,  presented  a  full  and  favorable  exposition  of  the 
whole  subject. 

The  message  of  the  President,  at  the  commencement  of  the  ensuing 
session  of  Congress,  invited  the  attention  of  its  members  to  the  accom- 
plishment of  this  object,  as  one  "of  great  service,  both  to  the  naviga- 
tion of  Delaware  Bay  and  the  protection  of  vessels  on  the  adjacent 
parts  of  the  coast;"  and  the  present  memorialists,  as  well  as  the 
Legislatures  of  Pennsylvania,  New  Jersey,  and  Delaware,  have  since 
urged  its  importance  upon  the  national  councils. 

Desirous  of  obtaining  information  the  most  plenary,  before  a  final 
decision  upon  a  measure  of  such  deep  interest,  Congress,  at  its  last 
session,  caused  exhibits  to  be  prepared  of  the  revenue  and  expenditures 
connected  with  commerce,  from  A.  D.  1790  to  A.  D.  1825,  in  the 
Delaware  Bay,  as  compared  with  three  other  of  our  great  commercial 
emporiums ;  and,  during  the  same  session,  procured  letters  from  the 
Secretary  of  the  Navy  and  the  chairman  of  the  Naval  Board,  on  the 
utility  of  the  proposed  breakwater  to  the  operations  of  our  navy  in 
war,  and  its  general  security  both  in  war  and  peace. 

From  these  various  documents  and  proceedings,  it  is  manifest  to 
your  committee,  that  there  has  existed  a  long,  a  general,  and  strong 
solicitude  for  the  object  contemplated  in  the  memorial ;  and  from  these 
same  sources,  and  such  general  considerations  as  obviously  bear  upon 
all  questions  of  commercial  magnitude,  your  committee  have  gathered 
and  would  present  the  following  specific  facts,  as  having  a  tendency 
to  aid  Congress  in  forming  a  judicious  opinion  upon  the  prayer  of  the 
petitioners. 

The  dangers  to  which  the  navigation  of  the  Delaware  Bay  is 
exposed  arise  principally  from  two  causes.  One  is  the  large  quantity 
of  ice  in  winter;  and  the  other,  the  peculiar  influence  of  the  wind  upon 
that  ice,  upon  the  tides,  and  the  general  navigation  of  a  bay  running 
in  such  a  direction,  and  with  such  depths  of  water.  The  effects  from 
the  ice,  the  general  course  of  the  winds,  the  form  of  the  bay,  the 
soundings,  and  the  tides,  are  stated  with  much  particularity  in  the 
report  of  the  engineers  before  mentioned,  and  need  not  here  be 
repeated. 

On  this  point  it  will  now  suffice  to  observe,  that  the  mouth  of  the 
bay  is  about  sixteen  miles  wide,  the  channels  intricate,  and  no  harbor 
of  safety  on  either  side,  where  vessels  can  lie  secure  to  improve  favor- 
able openings  in  the  ice  when  ascending  the  river  in  winter,  or  to 
seize,  in  any  season,  favorable  winds  and  weather  for  going  to  sea,  or 
to  shelter  themselves  from  storms,  when  overtaken  by  them  in  that 
neighborhood. 


BREAKWATER  AT  THE  MOUTH  OE  DELAWARE  BAY.     457 

From  the  first  cause  alone,  the  wonted  navigation  of  the  bay  is 
interrupted  full  two  months  of  the  year.  It  has  been  estimated,  by 
persons  of  much  observation  and  experience,  that,  during  such  inter- 
ruption, not  over  one  in  ten  of  the  vessels  enter  and  ascend  the 
bay,  which  otherwise  would,  if  the  proposed  improvement  takes  place; 
and  thus  that  more  than  one  hundred  square-rigged  vessels  are 
annually  forced  to  seek  other  ports,  at  great  inconvenience  and 
expense. 

From  this  and  other  causes  before  mentioned,  whose  influence  a 
breakwater  is  calculated  to  obviate,  the  whole  actual  commerce  of  the 
bay  is  subjected  to  an  increased  premium  of  insurance,  varying  from  one- 
half  to  one  and  a  half  per  cent.  This  burthen,  on  Philadelphia  alone, 
whose  tonnage,  in  A.  D.  1825,  exceeded  eighty-four  thousand  tons, 
and  whose  imports  exceeded  fifteen  millions,  would  amount  to  an 
annual  charge  of  not  less  than  $170,000.  On  the  commerce  of  a 
single  port  this  is  a  tax  at  once  oppressive  and  invidious ;  and  of  the 
aggregate  capital  of  the  country  at  large,  of  its  sinews  in  war  and  its 
prosperity  in  peace,  it  shows  an  entire  destruction  almost  to  the  extent 
of  the  increased  premiums,  as  they  are  calculated  to  cover  not  much 
beyond  the  actual  losses. 

Another  evidence  of  the  unfavorable  influence  of  these  causes  is  the 
marked  decline  in  the  tonnage  of  that  city,  compared  with  its  popula- 
tion in  A.  D.  1810  and  A.  D.  1820  — the  tonnage  having  sunk  from 
124,430  to  78,837  tons,  while  the  population  increased  from 
111,210  to  137,097.  Some  of  this  great  disparity  may  doubtless  be 
traced  to  other  circumstances.  But  it  is  well  known  that,  from 
the  causes  before  enumerated,  many  vessels  are  ordered  to  other 
ports  in  the  winter  season,  many  forced  away  by  necessity,  much 
tonnage  totally  destroyed  by  shipwreck,  and,  from  expensive  delays 
and  insurances,  considerable  capital  in  navigation  permanently  trans- 
ferred elsewhere. 

The  books  of  the  insurance  offices,  and  other  authentic  documents, 
in  Philadelphia  alone,  show,  within  the  last  twenty  years,  a  total  or 
partial  loss  of  more  than  two  hundred  vessels,  originating  in  the  neigh- 
borhood of  Delaware  Bay.  Sundry  instances  have  occurred  of  ten 
or  more  vessels  being  on  shore,  at  one  time,  near  its  mouth.  But  if 
there  be  added  to  these  burdens,  these  delays,  and  this  entire  destruc- 
tion of  such  amounts  of  property,  the  further  injury  to  the  country  at 
large  sustained  by  the  loss  of  many  lives  in  those  disastrous  ship- 
wrecks, the  importance  of  some  efficient  preventive  will  become  most 
urgent. 

Its  effect  will  not  be  merely  the  removal  of  those  evils  to  which  the 
commerce  of  the  bay  alone  has  been  exposed ;  but  the  proposed  break- 
water will  be  adapted  to  give  security  to  much  of  the  coasting  trade 
of  the  whole  Union.  A  large  portion  of  it  passes  near  the  outlet  of 
the  bay,  and  now,  when  threatened  or  assailed  with  gales  and  storms, 
has  no  safe  harbor  between  Sandy  Hook  and  Cape  Charles.  Delays, 
39 


t 


•* 


458     BREAKWATER  AT  THE  MOUTH  OF  DELAWARE  BAY. 

damage,  and  total  losses,  are  the  frequent  consequences,  and  seem  to 
call  for  our  interposition  the  more  imperatively,  as  that  branch  of  trade 
is  composed  exclusively  of  American  tonnage  ;  as  it  more  nearly  con- 
cerns every  section  of  the  country,  being,  in  a  great  degree,  devoted 
to  the  transportation  of  American  produce ;  and  as  its  rapid  increase, 
within  the  last  twenty  years,  renders  it,  in  every  point  of  view,  dear 
to  American  interests  and  American  feelings.  For,  within  twenty 
years,  it  has  more  than  doubled,  while  our  tonnage  engaged  in  the 
foreign  trade  has  declined  nearly  one-half,  and  at  present  but  little 
exceeds  the  former  in  amount.  Thus,  in  A.  D.  1807,  the  tonnage  in 
the  coasting  trade  was  only  285,990,  and  that  in  the  foreign  trade 
1,477,075;  while  in  A.  D.  1824,  the  former  was  606,893,  and  the 
latter  only  845,758. 

A  further  benefit  to  be  derived  from  a  breakwater,  or  artificial 
harbor,  at  the  mouth  of  Delaware  Bay,  is  the  like  security  it  would 
furnish  to  our  navy  under  the  circumstances  enumerated  in  respect  to 
vessels  engaged  in  the  coasting  trade.  But  especially  during  war,  on 
a  range  of  more  than  two  hundred  miles  of  sea-coast  now  almost  closed 
upon  the  navy,  would  it  find  such  a  harbor  highly  advantageous, 
when  pressed  by  a  superior  force,  or  when  desirous  of  some  inter- 
mediate station  from  which  to  attack  or  annoy  a  powerful  enemy. 
Concerning  the  practicability  of  erecting  such  a  breakwater,  the  report 
of  the  engineers,  after  a  thorough  examination,  would  appear  to  be 
decisive. 

Though  somewhat  novel  here,  similar  structures,  whether  called 
piers,  jetties,  or  breakwaters,  have  been  made  in  other  countries  with 
the  happiest  results,  and  in  situations  of  greater  exposure  and  of 
greater  depth  of  water.  Those  near  Dublin,  Plymouth  and  Cher- 
bourg, have  been  so  frequently  visited  and  described,  and  so  full  is  the 
information  possessed  on  this  subject  by  nautical  and  scientific  men,  as 
to  remove  all  doubt  upon  the  feasibility  of  the  present  measure  at  the 
place  contemplated. 

The  whole  expense  of  such  a  breakwater,  and  the  resources  of  the 
government  to  meet  it,  remain  to  be  considered. 

If  its  size  be  ample,  and  its  materials  the  most  durable,  —  and  only 
such  an  one  can  be  deemed  expedient,  ■ —  the  highest  estimate  of  its 
expense  has  been  $2,326,627.  This  estimate  was  founded  on  a 
minute  survey  of  the  bay,  on  the  depth  and  length  of  the  proposed 
breakwater,  the  cost  of  materials,  and  all  considerations,  of  whatever 
nature,  which  science  and  experience  could  bring  to  bear  on  the 
inquiry.  Other  estimates  have  been  made  by  persons  of  acknowl- 
edged skill,  reducing  the  sum,  by  an  alteration  in  the  position  of  the 
breakwater,  to  $1,380,478.  But,  adopting  the  highest  as  the  safest 
estimate,  the  means  to  defray  the  expense  are  assuredly  within  reach 
of  the  government,  may  be  obtained  near  at  hand,  and  their  appropria- 
tion to  this  object  would  not  be  likely  to  embarrass  our  finances,  or 
prove  invidious  towards  other  sections  of  the  Union.    Half  the  revenue 


BREAKWATER  AT  THE  MOUTH  OF  DELAWARE  BAY.     459 

from  the  port  of  Philadelphia  alone,  for  only  a  single  year,  lias  some- 
times been  sufficient  to  accomplish  the  whole  object.  The  reasonable- 
ness of  such  an  employment  of  it  will  be  more  striking,  when  we 
reflect  that  the  losses  it  might  prevent,  in  only  twelve  or  fourteen 
years,  would,  on  the  facts  before  particularized,  equal  ihe  entire  cost 
of  the  breakwater.  "That  it  can  be  spared,  also,  without  essential 
injury  to  our  financial  operation,  seems  probable,  when  it  is  considered 
that  the  whole  expenditure  will  not  be  required  for  some  years,  and 
that  even  one-half  of  the  annual  amount  heretofore  devoted  to  the 
increase  of  the  navy,  and  now  no  longer  pledged  for  that  purpose,  will 
doubtless  be  sufficient  to  commence  the  work,  and  if  thus  dedicated 
yearly,  till  the  breakwater  is  completed,  will  only  be  continuing  a  part 
of  the  old  appropriation  to  another  great  object  of  commercial  and 
national  importance. 

In  the  narrowest  view,  however,  as  to  its  advantages,  and  in  the 
shape  of  an  increased  charge  upon  our  finances,  it  cannot  be  considered 
an  undue  appropriation  for  the  protection  and  prosperity  of  the  com- 
merce of  the  Delaware  Bay,  when  its  revenues  and  expenses  since 
A.  D.  1790  are  compared  with  those  of  other  important  points  on  our 
sea-board. 

Thus  the  revenue  derived  to  government  from  the  commerce  of  the 
Delaware  Bay,  from  A.  D.  1790  to  A.  D.  1825,  was  $80,313,721, 
and  the  expenditures  there,  during  the  same  time,  on  forts,  light- 
houses, beacons,  &c,  were  $835,483,  or  only  about  one-hundredth 
of  the  revenue.  But,  during  the  same  time,  the  revenue  from 
the  Chesapeake  Bay  was  only  $56,963,669,  and  the  expenditures 
on  like  objects  were  $3,253,611,  or  about  one-nineteenth  of  the 
revenue.  In  New  York  harbor,  the  expenditures  have  been  nearly 
one-thirty-sixth  of  the  revenue,  and  in  Boston  harbor  one-seventieth 
of  it. 

Expensive  works  also  are  in  contemplation,  or  in  progress,  in 
each  of  the  three  last  places,  and  will  shortly  make  the  expenditures 
in  some  of  them  greater,  and  in  others  not  much  less,  than  those 
in  Delaware  Bay,  with  the  addition  of  the  proposed  breakwater. 

On  a  deliberate  consideration,  then,  of  all  the  foregoing  circum- 
stances, reflecting,  in  brief,  that  above  this  breakwater  the  tide  flows 
up  a  noble  river  more  than  one  hundred  and  fifty  miles,  through 
a  country  of  great  fertility  and  wealth ;  that  most  of  the  commerce 
of  three  States  floats  upon  its  waters ;  that,  from  the  want  of  such 
a  breakwater,  this  commerce  is  now  exposed  to  great  and  peculiar 
inconveniences  and  disasters,  as  are  likewise  the  navy  and  much  of 
the  coasting  trade  of  the  whole  Union;  that  the  practicability  of 
the  measure  is  so  certain,  and  its  cost  so  much  within  the  resources 
of  the  government  obtained  from  that  immediate  neighborhood; 
that  the  amount  required  for  its  accomplishment  is  not  dispropor- 
tioned  to  the  equal  claims  of  that  section  of  country,  or  the  numerous 
benefits,  both  local  and  general,  anticipated  from  the  measure;  and 


460     BREAKWATER  AT  THE  MOUTH  OF  DELAWARE  BAY. 

that  a  gradual  appropriation  to  this  object,  as  fast  as  the  money 
can  advantageously  be  expended,  will  not  be  likely  to  embarrass 
our  financial  operations; — the  committee  entertain  an  opinion  that 
the  prayer  of  the  memorial  is  reasonable,  and  report  the  accompany- 
ing bill. 


GUBERNATORIAL  MESSAGE. 


SPEECHES  AND  REPORTS  ON  STATE  TOPICS. 


39* 


GUBERNATORIAL   MESSAGE,  SPEECHES 
AND  REPORTS  ON  STATE  TOPICS. 


MESSAGE  TO   THE  LEGISLATURE  OF  NEW  HAMPSHIRE.* 

Gentlemen  of  the  Senate  and 

House  of  Representatives : 

My  elevation  to  the  office  of  Chief  Magistrate  of  this  State  was 
altogether  unexpected ;  and  the  approbation  such  a  distinguished  honor 
seems  to  bestow  on  my  past  conduct  deserves  the  most  grateful 
acknowledgment.  But  a  consciousness  of  inability  to  discharge  a 
trust  of  this  importance  in  the  manner  required  by  our  public  inter- 
ests would  have  deterred  me  from  accepting  it,  had  not  so  strong  an 
expression  of  the  people's  confidence  inspired  hopes  that  the  charity 
and  candor  hitherto  experienced  will  be  continued  towards  my  humble 
endeavors  to  be  useful. 

Animated  by  such  considerations,  and  relying  upon  that  Providence 
without  whose  blessing  all  human  exertions  are  fruitless,  and  upon  the 
wisdom  of  the  Council  whom  the  constitution  has  made  my  advisers, 
I  have  entered  on  the  arduous  duties  assigned  me,  and  take  this  oppor- 
tunity to  tender  you  assurances  of  my  cordial  cooperation  in  any 
measures  which  may  be  required  by  the  great  principles  of  our  gov- 
ernment or  the  true  interests  of  the  State. 

Among  the  most  sacred  of  those  principles  my  education  and  polit- 
ical faith  have  always  led  me  to  rank  the  general  diffusion  of  knowl- 
edge, equality  of  rights,  liberty  of  conscience,  and  a  strict  accounta- 
bility of  all  public  servants.  In  regard  to  those  interests,  it  would  be 
presumption  to  attempt  a  more  just  enumeration  of  them  than  is  con- 
tained in  the  injunction  of  our  constitution,  that  "  it  shall  be  the  duty 
of  the  legislators  and  magistrates,  in  all  future  periods  of  this  govern- 
ment, to  cherish  the  interests  of  literature  and  the  sciences,  and  all 
seminaries  and  public  schools  ;    to  encourage  private  and  public  insti- 

*Made  while  Governor  of  that  State,  1823. 


464  MESSAGE. 

tutions,  rewards  and  immunities  for  the  promotion  of  agriculture,  arts, 
sciences,  commerce,  trades,  manufactures,  and  natural  history  of  the 
country ;  to  countenance  and  inculcate  the  principles  of  humanity  and 
general  benevolence,  public  and  private  charity,  industry  and  econ- 
omy, honesty  and  punctuality,  sobriety,  and  all  social  affections  and 
generous  sentiments  among  the  people." 

These  expressions  indicate  that  our  fathers  considered  the  subject 
of  education  as  the  first  in  magnitude  among  the  general  concerns  of 
legislation ;  and  their  strong  conviction  of  its  importance  called  forth 
the  additional  remark,  that  "  knowledge  and  learning,  generally  dif- 
fused through  a  community,"  were  "  essential  to  the  preservation  of  a 
free  government."  The  excellence  of  knowledge  and  learning,  in  this 
respect,  consists  much  in  their  tendency  to  cherish  habits  of  mental 
occupation,  to  rectify  errors  in  opinion,  to  excite  benevolent  feelings 
between  persons  separated  by  party  or  religious  belief,  and,  while 
inspiring  the  heart  with  virtue  and  honor,  to  disclose  the  real  extent 
of  our  powers,  rights,  and  duties. 

Under  the  influence  of  such  views,  the  policy  of  this  State  has 
improved,  till  the  money  employed  in  the  free  instruction  of  its  citi- 
zens is  thought  to  exceed  what  any  other  government  of  equal  resources 
may  raise  for  a  similar  purpose.  Besides  an  annual  tax  for  schools  of 
ninety  thousand  dollars,  considerable  sums  in  aid  of  it  are  expended 
by  spirited  individuals ;  and  a  literary  fund,  to  be  hereafter  appropri- 
ated, is  accumulating  at  the  rate  of  about  five  thousand  dollars  a  year. 
The  system  in  force  in  these  schools  enables  the  humblest  parent  to 
impart  to  his  children  all  that  knowledge  of  reading,  writing  and  arith- 
metic, grammar  and  geography,  which  the  transaction  of  the  common 
business  of  life  requires  ;  and,  of  late  years,  in  the  higher  branches  of 
these  studies,  a  zeal  for  improvement  has  appeared,  particularly  among 
females,  which  promises  signal  benefits  to  society.  Females  instruct 
us  all  at  an  age  when  impressions  are  most  durable ;  and  through  life 
they  exert  a  sovereign  influence  over  taste  and  fashion.  No  method, 
therefore,  can  be  devised,  which  encourages  so  just  hopes  of  a  reform 
in  the  intellectual  condition  of  a  people,  as  by  the  more  general  diffu- 
sion among  that  sex  of  studies  and  sciences  conducive  to  practical 
usefulness.*  But  with  us  any  favorable  change  of  this  kind  must  orig- 
inate in  our  free  schools,  because  in  them  the  affluent  of  both  sexes 
acquire  the  elements  of  knowledge,  and  nearly  all  the  poor  and  mid- 
dling classes  begin  and  complete  their  education.  For  these,  and  other 
reasons  too  obvious  to  need  recital,  constant  inquiries  should  be  made, 
whether  the  advantages  derived  from  these  schools  cannot  in  some 
way  be  enhanced.  Great  as  these  advantages  now  are,  it  is  manifest 
that  perfection  has  not  yet  been  obtained  in  the  selection  of  the  books 
in  common  use,  or  in  the  efficiency  and  economy  of  the  present  modes 

*  These  views  have  been  fully  confirmed  since,  by  the  experience  of  several  States. 
See  Reports  of  Mass.  Board  of  Education. 


MESSAGE.  465 

of  instruction ;  .  and,  without  question,  the  minds  of  both  parents  and 
children  are  susceptible  of  still  deeper  impressions  as  to  the  unspeaka- 
ble importance  of  improving  their  present  opportunities.  I  would, 
therefore,  with  respectful  deference  to  your  own  observations  on  this 
subject,  recommend  that  our  inspecting  committees  be  required  to 
make  to  the  Legislature  annual  reports  of  the  books  and  studies, 
together  with  the  number,  sex,  and  age  of  the  scholars,  in  their  respect- 
ive towns,  New  light  would  thus  be  thrown  upon  the  object  of  your 
inquiries,  and,  beside  the  salutary  excitement  from  such  a  measure,  the 
details  it  would  furnish  might  suggest  many  legal  provisions  of  lasting 
usefulness. 

Whether,  in  a  State  of  our  limited  revenue,  it  will  ever  be  practicable 
to  endow  with  sufficient  funds  a  free  university,  may  admit  of  doubt. 
The  expense  of  necessary  buildings,  library,  philosophical  apparatus, 
and  competent  professors,  is  formidable,  and  would  seem  to  require 
that  aid  from  the  ampler  resources  of  the  nation  which  a  few  years 
ago  was  confidently  anticipated.  But  aid  from  that  quarter  having 
since  become  doubtful,  our  literary  fund  might  be  permitted  to  accu- 
mulate till  the  question  receives  a  final  decision ;  or,  abandoning  hopes 
of  an  institution  calculated  to  reflect  such  honor  on  our  character,  and 
at  the  same  time  confer  so  many  advantages  on  the  people  at  large, 
this  fund  might  now  be  employed,  with  usefulness  to  the  cause  of  let- 
ters, in  the  patronage  of  public  colleges  and  academies,  not  strictly 
free,  or  in  donations  of  globes  and  maps  to  the  use  of  our  common 
schools,  or  in  the  establishment  in  each  county  of  a  short  course  of 
lectures  on  subjects  of  agriculture,  mechanics,  and  the  general  appli- 
cation of  the  sciences  to  the  arts  and  the  business  of  life.  It  affords 
gratification  to  reflect,  that,  however  small  in  appearance  may  be  any 
improvement  adopted  concerning  education,  benefits  of  very  considera- 
ble extent  will  probably  ensue  from  the  impulse  it  may  give,  in  the 
pursuit  of  knowledge,  to  that  large  class  of  ambitious  yeomanry  who 
constitute  the  bone  and  muscle  of  the  State. 

The  promotion  of  "  Agriculture  "  appears  to  have  occupied  the  next 
rank  in  the  estimation  of  those  patriots  who  braved  the  perils  of  our 
Revolution  to  secure  the  great  interests  of  society  on  the  foundation 
of  fixed  principles.  So  high  an  estimation  of  agriculture  was  well 
warranted  by  the  circumstance  that  nearly  all  our  population,  either 
for  a  constant  or  occasional  employment,  have  been  accustomed  to 
the  cultivation  of  the  earth ;  and  that  the  necessity  of  this  pursuit  to 
the  support  of  every  other,  and  the  permanent  increase  of  value  it 
imparts  to  the  soil,  independent  of  its  annual  products,  stand  among 
the  first  truths  in  political  economy.  These  truths  may  have  been 
strengthened  in  their  influence  by  the  moral  worth  which  has  always 
distinguished  a  people  devoted  to  this  primitive  occupation  of  the 
human  race.  Its  importance,  in  our  country,  as  the  source  of  national 
wealth,  is  conspicuous,  and  needs  no  stronger  illustration  than  the 
striking  fact,  that  the  products  of  agriculture  constitute  about  forty  of 


466  MESSAGE. 

the  fifty  millions  of  the  annual  exports  from  the  United  States  from 
domestic  sources.  The  quantity  from  this  State  alone  cannot  be 
ascertained  with  much  certainty.  But  as  the  custom-house  books,  the 
last  year,  exhibit  an  amount  of  agricultural  exports  from  our  only  sea- 
port equal  to  forty-three  thousand  nine  hundred  and  one  dollars ;  as 
the  lumber,  more  than  one-half  the  value  of  which  is  derived  from 
agricultural  labor,  amounted  to  fifty-one  thousand  seven  hundred  and 
one  dollars  more ;  as  produce  to  the  value  of  about  thirty-eight  thou- 
sand dollars  was  carried  away  in  the  coasting  trade,  and  does  not 
appear  on  the  custom-house  books ;  and  as  the  quantity  of  these  arti- 
cles raised  and  transported  from  other  parts  of  our  territory  to  Mas- 
sachusetts, Maine,  Connecticut,  and  Canada,  is  undoubtedly  from  seven 
to  nine  times  more  than  what  is  exported  from  Portsmouth, —  I  am 
inclined  to  think  that  our  total  surplus  produce  from  agriculture 
approaches  very  near  a  million  of  dollars. 

When  we  advert  to  facts  like  these,  and  consider  that,  in  A.  D. 
1791,  the  agricultural  exports  from  our  sea-board  were  not  one-third 
of  their  present  amount,  and  from  other  parts  of  New  Hampshire,  in 
consequence  of  their  more  recent  settlement,  must  have  been  in  a  pro- 
portion still  smaller,  it  would  seem  impossible  to  feel  indifference 
towards  the  increasing  magnitude  of  this  branch  of  industry.  The 
commendable  attention  which,  for  some  years,  the  Legislature  have 
bestowed  on  its  advancement,  has  kindled  much  emulation,  and  opened 
an  avenue  to  many  improvements ;  and,  what  exceeds  all  price,  the 
intelligent  farmer  is  rising  rapidly  to  that  rank  and  respect  in  society 
which  persons  of  inferior  usefulness  have  too  often  engrossed.  But 
permit  me  to  suggest  that  still  further  advantages  would  accrue,  if 
more  particular  inquiries  were  directed  to  the  different  kinds  of  culti- 
vation, grains  and  stock,  which  are  adapted  to  any  peculiarities  in  our 
soil  or  climate.  The  discovery  of  these  peculiarities,  some  of  which 
exist  in  every  county,  and  almost  every  neighborhood,  is  now  a 
far  greater  desideratum  than  knowledge  of  general  husbandry,  since 
treatises  connected  with  that  have  been  multiplied  from  some  of  the 
earliest  profane  writings,  down  to  the  very  ingenious  essays  of  our 
own  board  of  agriculture.  Nothing  could  contribute  to  advance  this 
end  with  more  rapidity  than  an  agricultural  survey  of  the  State.* 
Such  a  measure  would  excite,  on  these  subjects,  renewed  and  deeper 
interest ;  would  tend  to  combine  the  researches  of  science  with  the 
practical  fruits  of  experience,  and  to  correct  numerous  local  errors  in 
every  branch  of  husbandry ;  the  leading  chemical  properties  of  the  soil 
in  different  ranges,  and  at  different  heights  and  latitudes,  in  the  State, 
would  thus  be  tested,  and  its  peculiar  fitness  for  different  crops,  and 
its  want  of  different  manures,  in  some  degree  ascertained ;  its  natural 
growth  of  valuable  trees,  plants  and  grasses,  might  be  made  known ; 

*  Judge  Woodbury  was  the  first  Governor  of  the  State  officially  to  suggest  scientific 
surveys  for  practical  purposes, 


MESSAGE.  467 

its  rocks  and  metals  so  far  examined  as  they  may  indicate  tlie  quality 
of  the  earth  for  any  particular  cultivation,  or  unfold  its  riches  in  regard 
to  lime,  plaster,  coal,  iron,  and  other  articles  of  general  utility ;  the 
different  practices  in  relation  to  the  same  crops,  and  the  improved 
instruments  of  labor,  in  different  sections  of  the  State,  be  noted  ;  and, 
in  fine,  every  fact  collected  which  may  be  thought  conducive  to  agri- 
cultural prosperity,  and  a  better  acquaintance  with  the  great  resources 
of  our  soil.  Such  a  measure  would  likewise  promote  a  knowledge  of 
"the  natural  history  of  the  country,"  which  is  another  injunction  of 
the  constitution  on  all  "  legislators  and  magistrates." 

The  estimated  expense  of  this  survey  does  not  exceed  three  hun- 
dred dollars  to  each  county.  If  this  sum  should  appear  too  large  for 
a  single  appropriation,  it  might  be  divided  between  two  or  three  suc- 
cessive years  ;  and,  whether  advanced  by  the  county  societies  or  the 
State,  would  prove  a  mere  loan,  to  be  repaid  with  little  delay  and  at 
the  highest  interest,  by  its  advantages  to  the  community. 

Before  leaving  a  subject  of  such  general  interest,  it  may  be  pardon- 
able to  advert  to  a  few  changes  in  the  agricultural  economy  of  the 
people  of  this  State  which  appear  to  merit  your  favorable  counte- 
nance. 

We  ought  to  import  none  of  our  bread-stuffs.  For,  though  political 
philosophy  forbids  sudden  shocks  to  the  existing  order  of  things,  and 
though  some  pursuits  disagree  with  the  taste  and  local  condition  of  our 
population,  yet,  with  these  limitations,  convenience  and  profit  require 
us  to  obtain  from  our  own  labor  or  neighborhoods  all  the  necessaries 
of  life.  Where  wheat  sufficient  for  domestic  consumption  cannot  be 
raised  with  success, —  though  such  places  are  here  fewer  in  number  than 
was  once  apprehended,  —  the  use  of  it  should  yield  further  to  grains 
which  long  experience  has  proved  to  be  equally  conducive  to  health 
and  more  congenial  to  some  of  our  soil.  It  is  another  reproach,  that, 
with  pasturage  in  such  excellence  and  abundance,  more  wool  is  not 
grown  here,  for  the  domestic  demand  of  the  United  States, — a  demand 
so  large  as  to  cause,  during  the  last  year,  an  importation  of  raw  wool 
to  the  value  of  three  hundred  and  eighty-seven  thousand  dollars. 

It  has  been  ascertained,  also,  that  we  can  raise  the  Leghorn  as  well 
as  the  common  straw,  and  possess  native  grasses  which  are  elegant 
substitutes  for  both  ;  yet,  the  value  of  hats  and  bonnets  imported  into 
this  country  the  past  season,  from  Italy  alone,  amounted  to  six  hun- 
dred thousand  dollars ;  and  it  is  feared  that  our  fair  friends,  many  of 
whom  are  distinguished  for  ingenuity  in  the  manufacture  of  these 
articles,  have  paid  almost  a  full  proportion  of  this  unnecessary  tax. 

The  value  of  the  coffee  and  tea  brought  into  the  United  States,  in 
the  year  ending  September,  A.  D.  1822,  after  deducting  what  was 
reexported,  amounted  to  about  five  millions  of  dollars ;  and  though 
with  us,  as  elsewhere,  the  vitiated  appetite  for  these  foreign  luxuries 
is  seated  with  such  firmness  as  to  preclude  hopes  of  reform,  either 
speedy  or  thorough,  yet  a  gradual  substitution  of  other  vegetables  of 


468  MESSAGE. 

our  own  culture  is  practicable  and  increasing,  and  deserves  the  encour- 
agement of  every  friend  to  domestic  economy. 

The  connection  of  some  of  these  subjects  with  manufactures  imparts 
to  them  additional  importance.  At  the  time  our  constitution  intrusted 
to  us  the  protection  of  "  Manufactures,"  as  well  as  of  "  Agriculture," 
the  annual  exports  from  the  former  on  our  sea-board  were  less  than 
five  thousand  dollars.  In  A.  D.  1822,  they  were  forty-three  thou- 
sand four  hundred  and  seventy  dollars.  Considering  that,  in  the  vari- 
ety of  other  outlets  to  manufactures,  the  increase  must  have  been 
nearly  proportionate,  and  is  swelled  even  by  our  exports  from  granite 
and  soapstone, — considering,  likewise,  that  manufactures  often  furnish 
a  market  of  the  highest  value  and  constancy  to  agriculture,  and  that 
those  called  household  contribute  no  less  to  wealth  and  diligent  habits 
than  to  domestic  comfort, — we  should  not  refuse  to  manufacturing  indus- 
try that  patronage  which  its  magnitude  merits.  But  remarks  of  this 
kind  are  made  with  no  view  to  solicit  favor  for  manufactures  unfitted 
to  our  state  of  society,  and  neither  connected  with  the  internal 
resources,  nor  intended  to  supply  the  necessities,  so  much  as  the  lux- 
uries, of  our  people.  These  last  articles  form  legitimate  subjects  of 
foreign  commerce.  On  the  contrary,  I  would  cherish  such  manufac- 
tures as  our  wants,  our  means,  and  our  permanent  interests,  may  war- 
rant. Thus,  the  cultivation  of  flax  deserves  increased  attention;  because 
this  plant  thrives  richly  on  our  soil,  and,  in  addition  to  the  valuable 
manufacture  from  its  seed,  the  domestic  fabrics  from  the  stalk  pro- 
mote family  industry,  and  afford  a  fair  profit  to  agriculture.  Without 
any  change  in  the  national  tariff  impairing  its  productiveness  as  a 
source  of  revenue,  a  discriminating  zeal  might  also  furnish  New 
Hampshire,  from  her  own  establishments,  with  a  greater  portion  of  her 
bar  and  cast  iron,  with  most  of  her  lime  and  sugar,  and  with  all  her 
cottons,  woollens,  glass,  paper  and  nails.  Nature  has  lavished  upon 
us  many  of  the  raw  materials  for  these  manufactures ;  our  hills  are 
clothed  with  abundance  of  wood  for  furnaces,  and  almost  every  dis- 
trict is  enriched,  as  well  as  adorned,  with  the  finest  falls  of  water  for 
machinery. 

The  policy  now  recommended  has  been  enforced  by  my  immediate 
predecessor,  with  an  ability  which  makes  further  comment  useless ; 
and  the  wisdom  of  such  a  policy  is  confirmed  by  the  fact,  that  a  dis- 
position among  us,  in  past  years,  to  favor  manufactures,  has  intro- 
duced here  and  established  some  of  the  largest  capitals  in  New  Eng- 
land. 

As  an  encouragement  to  "Arts"  and  "Trades,"  the  exercise  of 
which,  by  our  mechanics,  furnishes  many  of  the  comforts  of  life,  and, 
in  the  improvement  of  implements  of  husbandry,  is  a  source  of  much 
public  wealth,  I  would  suggest  the  propriety  of  assigning  some  spare 
room  in  the  public  buildings  in  this  place  for  the  deposit  of  speci- 
mens of  their  ingenious  labors.  Under  the  eye  of  the  Legislature  and 
the  care  of  the  Board  of  Agriculture,  all  inventions  of  a  useful  char- 


MESSAGE.  469 

acter  would  thus  become  known,  and  with  rapidity  and  profit  might  be 
disseminated  over  the  State. 

The  promotion  of  "Commerce"  is  another  subject  committed  to 
your  care  by  the  constitution.  But  the  powers  of  the  General  Govern- 
ment over  that  branch  of  industry  are  so  paramount,  and  have  been 
exercised  such  a  length  of  time,  and  in  many  respects  with  a  liberality  so 
judicious,  that  little  remains  for  State  legislation.  All  which  our  foreign 
commerce  can  expect  from  us  is  a  discreet  patronage  of  agriculture  and 
manufactures,  so  as  to  create  more  surplus  materials  to  feed  this  com- 
merce, and  a  due  attention  to  the  facilities  for  transporting  those  mate- 
rials to  our  own  sea-board,  wherever  our  own  sea-board  is  able  to  furnish 
a  market  equal  in  convenience  and  excellence  to  that  of  other  States. 
This  mutual  dependence  between  these  great  departments  of  industry 
ought  to  produce  between  them  harmony,  rather  than  jealousies,  and 
is  doubtless  a  provision  of  Providence  to  combine  all  the  energies  of 
society  in  the  advancement  of  human  happiness.  It  must,  therefore, 
be  a  gratification  to  our  citizens  of  every  profession  to  learn,  tha/t, 
though  a  large  portion  of  the  imports  and  exports  of  New  Hampshire 
help  to  fill  the  custom-house  records  in  other  States,  yet  a  gradual 
increase  of  both  at  our  only  sea-port  has  made  its  way  through  many 
severe  calamities.  Since  A.  D.  1791,  when  the  whole  amount  of 
each  of  them  was  less  than  one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  dollars,  the 
annual  imports  have  risen  to  an  average,  for  the  last  five  years,  of  four 
hundred  and  fifty-five  thousand  six  hundred  and  eighty-seven  dollars, 
and  the  exports  to  three  hundred  and  forty-five  thousand  eight  hun- 
dred and  seven  dollars. 

Our  inland  commerce,  by  means  of  roads,  bridges,  and  canals,  is  a 
subject  of  more  general  solicitude.  Its  connection  is  more  immediate 
with  the  interests  and  enjoyments  of  every  class  of  people  ;  and  some 
diversity  of  opinion  prevails,  whether  the  constitution  of  the  United 
States  permits  us  to  receive  the  aid  of  Congress  in  this  species  of 
internal  improvement.  But  the  temptation  to  raise  surplus  produce 
and  the  value  of  it  when  raised  being  in  a  ratio  with  the  excellence  of 
the  means  to  transport  it  to  market,  and  no  prospect  existing  of  the 
present  assistance,  whatever  may  be  the  power,  of  our  National  Gov- 
ernment to  improve  these  means  in  New  Hampshire,  it  would  ill  com- 
port with  the  foresight  required  in  public  affairs  to  withhold  from  these 
means  any  encouragement  which  the  smallness  of  our  resources  and 
the  frugality  of  our  policy  may  justify. 

Every  facility  should  be  afforded  to  open  and  straighten  roads  lead- 
ing to  the  nearest  markets  from  different  sections  of  the  State.  Im- 
proved methods  should,  if  possible,  be  devised  for  expending  in  their 
repair  the  large  sums  annually  raised  by  fines  and  taxes.  And  the  sub- 
stitution of  canals,  where  it  can  be  effected  at  a  moderate  expense,  is 
such  a  gain  in  the  cost  of  transportation  as  should  make  them  objects 
of  continual  solicitude.  The  price  of  freight  on  waters  by  nature 
navigable,  compared  with  the  expense  of  transportation  on  land,  is,  for 
40 


470  MESSAGE. 

short  distances  as  one  to  twelve,  and  for  long  distances  as  one  to  a 
hundred ;  and,  where  navigation  is  aided  by  art,  the  average  propor- 
tion is  estimated  by  engineers  to  be  one  to  twenty.  But  in  our  uneven 
and  rocky  soil  the  difference  is  less,  though,  wherever  the  smallest 
part  of  the  expense  of  land  carriage  can  be  saved  by  canals,  they 
become  an  object  of  public  consequence.  In  countries  whose  popula- 
tion and  business  are  on  the  increase,  the  usefulness  of  canals  to  com- 
munity is  often  accompanied  by  a  large  profit  to  stockholders ;  and 
though  this  last  result  has  not  yet  happened  in  more  than  two  or  three 
instances  of  our  own  improvements  on  the  Connecticut  and  Merrimac 
rivers,  still  in  England  the  dividends  on  fifteen  canals  have  averaged 
over  thirty  per  cent. ;  and,  as  their  erection  and  repair  are  now  better 
understood,  the  capital  hereafter  invested  in  them  in  advantageous 
routes  is  likely  to  be  productive. 

One  of  these  routes,  between  Dover  and  Alton,  has  before  received 
legislative  attention.  But  the  estimated  expense  of  three  hundred  and 
fifty  thousand  dollars  has  appeared  so  formidable  as  to  dishearten  pri- 
vate enterprise,  "and  perhaps,  without  national  aid,  would  render  ques- 
tionable the  future  expediency  of  a  canal  the  whole  distance.  Leaving 
a  portage,  however,  of  six  miles,  where  the  fall  is  greater  than  in  all 
the  other  twenty  miles  from  Winnepiseogee  Lake  to  tide-water,  it 
might  be  sound  economy  to  encourage  a  canal  the  rest  of  the  distance ; 
and  the  comparative  expense  would  be  trifling  to  connect  the  same  lake 
and  the  Pemigewasset  at  Plymouth,  by  a  canal  in  the  direction  of  the 
Squam  ponds.  In  this  route,  Plymouth  lies  only  eighty-five  miles 
from  the  sea-board,  and  more  than  half  that  distance  is  now  water 
navigable  by  nature,  without  any  aid  from  art.* 

But  further  remarks  on  subjects  connected  with  our  inland  com- 
merce are  unnecessary,  since  their  importance  to  the  public  has  not 
heretofore  been  overlooked,  and  since  reflection  must  convince  all  that 
the  advancement  of  some  of  these  objects  may  contribute  not  only  to 
the  agricultural  prosperity  of  the  State  as  now  settled,  but  to  the 
more  speedy  occupation  of  our  unsettled  lands  by  a  surplus  popula- 
tion, which  otherwise  might  emigrate,  and  cover  the  forests  of  remote 
States  with  the  fruits  of  their  industry.  Measures  of  this  twofold 
tendency,  directed  to  improvements  either  in  our  western,  central, 
or  eastern  roads  and  waters,  promise  the  greatest  utility ;  and  if,  by 
an  equal  and  judicious  policy,  some  of  them  at  the  same  time  should 
happen  to  enlarge  our  foreign  commerce,  or  lessen  our  dependence 
upon  other  governments  for  a  market,  these  incidental  consequences 
cannot  fail  to  enlist  more  strongly  in  their  support  the  patriotism  of 
all  who  cherish  a  just  sense  of  State  pride  and  ambition.  Such  a  pol- 
icy is  the  only  one  worthy  an  enlightened  people,  and  would  be  most 
benignant  in  its  influence  on  sectional  jealousies,  and  in  allaying  those 
angry  and  vindictive  feelings  which  faction,  folly,  and  ignorance,  are 

*  The  importance  of  this  suggestion  has  been  since  verified  by  railroad  enterprise 


MESSAGE.  471 

apt  to  inflame.  But,  in  a  State  so  limited  in  territory  and  resources,  it 
is  probable  that  no  new  legislative  appropriation  to  these  objects  will 
ever  be  expected,  unless,  where  the  wild  lands  of  the  State  may  receive 
peculiar  benefit  from  new  roads  or  canals,  it  should  be  deemed  expe- 
dient to  apply  the  proceeds  of  part  of  those  lands  to  objects  so  directly 
calculated  to  raise  the  value  of  the  remainder. 

Among  the  miscellaneous  subjects  to  which  a  sense  of  duty  impels 
me  to  invite  your  attention,  are  a  few  changes  of  inconsiderable  mag- 
nitude in  our  statutes.  Laws  should  not  be  subjected  to  great  or  fre- 
quent alterations,  because  every  essential  change  in  the  rules  of  prop- 
erty, of  personal  rights  and  their  remedies,  requires  new  labor  to 
understand  those  rules,  and  till  the  change  receives  a  judicial  construc- 
tion, questions  remain  unsettled,  and  much  expense  is  incurred.  But 
small  alterations  are  attended  with  less  hazard,  and  are  often  necessary 
to  meet  the  alterations  which  time  produces  in  the  condition  of  soci- 
ety. 

In  our  criminal  code,  I  would  suggest  the  propriety  of  a  distinction 
between  the  length  of  hard  labor  in  the  state-prison  on  a  first  and  on 
a  second  conviction.  The  decreasing  expenses  of  that  institution, 
which,  from  an  annual  tax  of  about  two  thousand  dollars,  have  become 
less  than  the  value  of  the  labor  performed  in  it,  and  the  diminished 
number  of  convicts,  which  from  seventy-five  has  fallen  to  fifty-eight, 
are  sources  of  sincere  congratulation.  The  difference,  in  these 
respects,  between  this  and  other  States,  furnishes  a  high  compliment 
to  the  morals  of  our  people  and  the  vigilant  economy  of  our  warden. 
Thus,  in  Connecticut,  the  number  of  convicts,  compared  with  their 
population,  is  nearly  double  what  it  is  here ;  in  Vermont,  it  is  more 
than  double ;  in  Massachusetts,  it  is  treble ;  and  in  New  York,  it  is. 
four  times  as  great.  In  the  third  State  mentioned,  where  the  popula- 
tion is  little  more  than  twice  our  own,  the  commitments  are  said  to 
have  been  ninety-five  during  the  last  year  only ;  being  equal  to  almost 
half  the  whole  number  committed  here  since  the  erection  of  our  prison, 
in  A.  D.  1812.  It  will  be  unnecessary  to  enter  into  any  detail  of  the 
comparative  expenses,  when  it  is  known  that  our  whole  cost  for  food  to  each 
convict  in  the  year  just  ended  has  been  no  more  than  fourteen  dollars 
and  nine  cents,  and  for  clothing  and  bedding  no  more  than  seven  dol- 
lars and  sixteen  cents.  I  mention  this  fact  to  furnish,  also,  a  useful 
hint  concerning  the  necessary  expenses  of  paupers ;  and  though,  on 
this  occasion,  no  new  suggestions  will  be  offered  in  check  of  the  great 
moral  leprosy  our  system  of  poor  laws  is  calculated  to  spread, — and 
though  a  thorough  reform  in  them,  while  supposed  to  encounter  some 
of  the  noblest  sympathies  of  humanity,  may  well  be  approached  with 
reluctance, — yet  public  inquiries  on  this  subject  should  never  sleep,  as, 
within  a  few  years,  legislative  discussion  alone  has  aided,  if  not  excited, 
an  improved  economy  in  the  pauper  police  of  many  towns. 

Coroners'  inquests,  without  affording  any  assistance  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  justice,  often  prove  a  source  of  inconvenience  and  pain  to 


472  MESSAGE. 

the  jury,  and  impose  a  large  tax  on  the  county  treasuries.  If,  in  cases 
of  sudden  death,  attended  by  secrecy  and  suspicion,  inquests  some- 
times help  to  calm  popular  feeling,  I  would  recommend  that  hereafter 
they  be  held  only  at  the  expense  and  special  application  of  persons 
who,  in  any  particular  case,  may  entertain  that  opinion. 

The  care  recently  bestowed  on  our  militia  was  merited  by  the 
importance  of  so  valuable  an  institution.  But  the  principal  object 
which  can  be  attained  by  it  in  peace  is  the  preservation  of  good  arms 
in  the  hands  of  the  people,  with  a,  view  of  self-defence  against  lawless 
aggression,  and  a  constant  readiness  to  meet  any  public  emergency  of 
usurpation  or  war.  Yet  our  last  returns  exhibit  a  deficiency  in  mus- 
kets of  nearly  five  thousand, —  a  number  equal  to  one-fifth  of  our 
whole  infantry.  A  remedy  for  so  alarming  an  evil  appears  to  merit 
inquiry.  Some  persons  entertain  a  belief  that  the  present  system  is 
attended  by  evils  of  a  moral  and  pecuniary  character  equally  alarming, 
in  consequence  of  the  temptations  it  presents  to  intemperance  and 
idleness,  and  the  burthens  it  imposes  on  the  laboring  classes  of  soci- 
ety, in  unsuccessful  attempts  to  perfect  their  discipline.  But  one 
annual  inspection  of  arms  would  always  seem  indispensable ;  and, 
though  a  relief  from  all  other  military  duty  might  obviate  many  objec- 
tions, and  merits  the  consideration  of  the  Legislature,  yet  a  change  in 
our  militia,  even  to  this  extent,  ought  not  to  be  hazarded,  if  it  would 
tend  to  impair  the  efficiency  of  what  our  constitution  pronounces  to  be 
the  "proper,  natural,  and  sure  defence  of  a  State." 

Recent  experience  seems  to  designate,  with  sufficient  certainty,  some 
useful  changes  in  our  statute  concerning  the  choice  of  Representatives 
to  Congress. 

The  compensation  allowed  by  statute  to  Judges  of  Probate  is  sup- 
posed to  be  an  inadequate  reward  for  their  services ;  and,  although 
custom  may  warrant  them  in  receiving  sufficient  fees  beyond  what  the 
letter  of  the  statute  allows,  yet  it  deserves  consideration,  whether  it  is 
safe  for  them,  or  for  the  public,  that  their  emoluments  should  depend 
upon  the  vague  and  various  usages  of  the  several  counties,  and  whether 
it  might  not  remove  embarrassments,  and  promote  impartiality  and  cor- 
rectness in  business,  either  to  make  the  fee-bill  more  comprehensive 
and  explicit,  or  to  pay  the  judges  by  a  fixed  salary  out  of  a  fund  col- 
lected from  probate  proceedings. 

We  are  reminded,  by  the  constitution,  that,  in  "  order  to  reap  the 
fullest  advantage  of  the  inestimable  privilege  of  the  trial  by  jury, 
great  care  ought  to  be  taken  that  none  but  qualified  persons  should 
be  appointed  to  serve,  and  such  ought  to  be  fully  compensated  for  their 
time,  travel,  and  attendance."  Should  the  Legislature  advert  to  the 
value  of  the  rights,  the  amount  of  property,  and  the  difficulty  of  those 
inquiries,  often  submitted  to  a  jury,  no  care  could  appear  too  great  in 
the  appointment  of  persons  competent  to  a  task  of  such  arduous 
responsibility.  If  the  names  in  the  jury-boxes  were  less  numerous, 
the  chance  for  the  selection  of  "  none  but  qualified  persons"  would  be 


MESSAGE.  473 

increased  ;  and,  if  the  present  fees  are  insufficient  to  insure  the  cheer- 
ful services  of  citizens  most  distinguished  for  integrity  and  good  sense, 
joined  with  firmness  and  experience,  it  would  doubtless  promote  the 
public  interests  to  compensate  jurors  more  "fully  for  their  time,  travel, 
and  attendance."  This  could  be  effected  at  the  expense  of  litigants, 
or  the  county,  as  sound  economy  may  dictate.  On  caution  in  the 
appointment  of  jurors,  one  further  consideration,  partly  political,  and 
altogether  paramount  to  any  narrow  calculations  about  office  or  emolu- 
ment, arises  from  the  fact,  that,  in  proportion  as  jurors  are  well  quali- 
fied, their  verdicts  will  not  only  exhibit  greater  accuracy,  and  the 
artifices  of  injustice  encounter  greater  obstacles,  but  the  trial  by 
jury  —  that  great  palladium  of  civil  rights  —  will  acquire  from  the 
public  still  higher  veneration  and  confidence. 

Under  our  system  of  jurisprudence,  almost  every  argument  in  favor 
of  good  jurors  applies  with  increased  force  in  favor  of  good  judges. 
Indeed,  a  judiciary  enlightened  and  "independent,"  as  well  as 
"impartial,"  seems  by  the  constitution  to  be  considered  "essential  to 
the  preservation  of  the  rights  of  every  individual, — his  life,  liberty, 
property  and  character."  It  is,  therefore,  necessary,  that  you,  who 
are  intrusted  with  the  important  power  of  giving  force  and  efficiency 
to  that  department,  should  examine,  from  time  to  time,  whether  any 
change  would  impart  to  it  a  higher  degree  of  usefulness. 

•  So  far  as  usefulness  depends  on  the  form  of  any  system,  the  first 
object  should  be  to  carry  the  business  to  that  tribunal  whose  judgment 
is  final,  with  no  more  delay  and  cost  than  are  unavoidable  in  an  adher- 
ence to  other  judicial  principles.  The  next  object  is  to  have  such  a 
number  of  judges,  and  such  a  frequency  in  the  terms,  as  to  insure  due 
attention  and  despatch  to  the  business.  In  respect  to  the  administra- 
tion of  any  system,  all  considerate  men  will  agree,  that  the  judges,  no 
less  than  the  jurors,  should  be  selected  and  compensated  so  as  to  cause 
a  performance  of  the  business  in  the  best  manner ;  or,  in  other  words, 
so  as  to  obtain  and  preserve  in  this  arduous  service  those  citizens  best 
qualified  by  their  virtues,  talents  and  studies,  to  transact  the  judicial 
business  of  the  State.  In  forming  an  opinion  whether  the  present 
condition  of  our  judiciary  is  fitted  to  answer  these  ends,  it  should  not 
escape  consideration,  that  within  the  last  thirty  years  the  wealth  and 
population  of  New  Hampshire  have  nearly  doubled,  and,  of  necessity, 
have  produced  some  increase  in  the  number  of  litigated  actions ;  that 
the  practice  of  saving  each  year  about  one  hundred  questions  of  law  to 
be  examined  in  vacations  is  a  great  addition  to  judicial  labor ;  that 
this  change,  together  with  the  progress  of  law  as  a  science,  and  the 
consequent  improvement  of  the  bar,  renders  superior  qualifications 
requisite  in  judges  to  command  proper  confidence ;  that  their  expenses 
by  travel,  and  by  the  greater  number  and  duration  of  the  terms,  are 
much  enhanced ;  and,  in  fine,  that  the  trial  of  all  jury  actions  in  the 
State,  which  were  formerly  divided  between  two  tribunals, — one,  at 
times,  of  four,  and  the  other  of  six,  twelve  and  eighteen  judges, — is 
40* 


474  MESSAGE. 

now  devolved,  with  the  increased  fatigue  and  responsibility  before 
mentioned,  on  only  three  men,  whose  salaries  combined  do  not  equal 
the  compensation  to  many  single  judges  elsewhere. 

After  due  inquiry,  should  you  conclude  that  our  present  system, 
among  many  excellences,  possesses  some  defects,  but  that  these  are  of 
a  character  which  can  be  remedied  by  the  addition  of  another  judge 
and  of  other  terms,  where  desirable  to  prevent  cost  and  delay,  and  still 
leave  its  incidental  expenses  much  less  than  those  of  any  other  system, 
no  reasons  of  a  public  nature  have  occurred  to  me  which  would  justify 
an  abandonment  of  it. 

As  to  a  change  in  the  compensation  of  the  judges,  the  question 
should  be  settled  on  a  reference  to  the  facts  above  named,  and  on  the 
broad  principles  of  an  enlightened  policy.  While  a  course  vacillating 
and  short-sighted,  whether  in  public  or  private  affairs,  leads  to  waste 
and  extravagance,  care  is  at  the  same  time  necessary  to  prevent 
inroads  on  those  frugal  habits  which  form  so  strong  a  safeguard  to  the 
morals  and  prosperity  of  small  States ;  and  it  will  remain  for  you 
alone  to  decide  whether  a  moderate  increase  in  the  salary  of  those 
officers  would,  under  existing  circumstances,  tend  to  danger  of  this 
kind,  or  exceed  the  bounds  of  expediency  and  justice.  To  guard 
against  misconstruction,  it  may  be  added,  that  if  you  impose  a  larger 
fee  on  the  entry  of  actions,  in  order  to  meet  any  change  without  a  bur- 
then on  the  treasury,  and  if  a  part  of  this  fee  should  be  assigned  to 
the  clerks,  who  collect  it,  and  whose  very  faithful  services  receive  much 
less  reward  now  than  formerly,  I  am  not  aware  that  an  additional  com- 
pensation to  any  other  officers  in  any  department  of  our  government  is 
either  needed  or  desired. 

In  connection  with  judicial  concerns,  I  may  be  excused  for  one 
further  suggestion.  The  cautious  spirit  of  a  republic  seems  to  dictate 
that  some  limit  should  be  fixed  to  the  discretion  of  courts  in  awarding 
fines  and  imprisonment  for  contempts  and  offences  at  common  law. 
Without  such  a  limit,  unless  we  are  blessed  upon  the  bench  with 
angels  in  the  form  of  men,  no  small  danger  of  oppression  must  exist  in 
periods  of  party  violence,  and  in  cases  where  the  judges  themselves 
may  have  been  victims  of  wanton  calumny. 

It  is  a  distinguishing  feature  in  governments  like  ours,  that  the 
people  are  entitled  to  such  information  on  all  public  business  and 
expenditures  as  may  conduce  to  economy,  or  throw  light  on  the  admin- 
istration of  the  various  trusts  confided  to  their  agents.  I  would 
therefore  repeat,  in  substance,  a  remark  of  the  vigilant  statesman  who 
retired  from  this  chair  in  A.  D.  1819,  that  the  above  ends  would  be 
promoted,  a  useful  check  imposed  on  mistakes,  and,  in  time,  a  valuable 
body  of  statistical  facts  collected,  if  not  only  inspecting  committees,  but 
county  treasurers,  clerks  of  courts  and  registers  of  probate,  were 
required  to  make  to  the  Legislature  annual  reports  of  the  quantity  and 
character  of  the  business  connected  with  their  respective  offices. 

The  gradual  increase  of  our  small  library  at  the  seat  of  government 


MESSAGE.  475 

is  another  object  of  some  public  consequence.  If  confined  to  works  on 
political  economy,  national  law,  State  trials,  and  parliamentary  debates, 
the  necessary  appropriation  would  be  trifling,  and,  beside  the  credit  of 
such  a  proceeding  to  the  Legislature,  the  advantage  to  be  derived  from 
recourse  to  books  of  this  kind,  on  questions  of  order,  impeachment, 
addresses  for  removal  of  officers,  and  important  measures  of  State 
policy  or  State  rights,  must  be  obvious  to  every  intelligent  politician. 

In  the  deficiency  of  surplus  funds  for  this  or  the  agricultural  pur- 
poses before  mentioned,  permit  me  to  inquire  whether  public  expedi- 
ency would  not  justify  you  in  obtaining  them  by  a  small  fee  for 
licenses  to  retailers  of  spirituous  liquors.  In  each  town  this  fee 
might  be  paid  to  the  selectmen,  and  by  them  to  the  State  treasurer, 
and,  in  the  end,  to  a  considerable  extent,  it  would  prove  a  tax  on 
intemperance.  By  indirect  means  the  Legislature  might  thus  promote 
that  "sobriety"  which  the  constitution  urges  them  to  "inculcate;" 
and  by  employing  the  money  to  advance  some  useful  industry,  or  the 
cause  of  literature,  would  contribute  something  to  the  interests  of 
morality  and  piety. 

Often  as  I  have  adverted  to  the  constitution,  it  is  hoped  a  sufficient 
apology  may  be  found  in  the  purity  of  those  principles  which  pervade 
this  solemn  charter  of  our  liberties,  in  the  oaths  of  us  all  to  support  it, 
and  in  the  impressive  admonition  of  our  bill  of  rights,  that  a  "fre- 
quent recurrence  to  the  fundamental  principles  of  the  constitution" 
"is  indispensably  necessary  to  preserve  the  blessings  of  liberty  and 
good  government."  In  truth,  gentlemen,  it  is  our  State  constitution, 
State  laws,  State  interests,  and  State  resources,  with  which  we.  as  State 
officers,  are  immediately  concerned ;  and,  without  turning  aside  to  dis- 
cuss any  prominent  measures  of  our  national  government,  the  import- 
ance of  which,  however,  cannot  be  too  highly  estimated,  or  to  express 
at  length  what  we  all  doubtless  feel, —  deep  sympathy  with  struggling 
Greece,  and  the  triumphs  of  Spanish  freedom  in  either  hemisphere, — 
I  have  found  leisure  to  invite  your  attention  only  to  our  own  local 
affairs.  The  character  and  dignity,  no  less  than  the  interests,  of  this 
State,  as  an  independent  sovereignty,  seem  to  appeal  to  the  Legislature 
to  give  a  new  impulse  to  her  energies,  and  for  all  domestic  purposes  to 
take  a  lead  in  cherishing  among  our  citizens  a  bold  reliance  on  their 
own  enterprise,  and  on  the  strength  and  excellence  of  their  own  insti- 
tutions ;  and  hereafter,  as  far  as  possible,  to  retain  at  home  and  per- 
petuate that  hardy  spirit  of  valor,  adventure,  and  industry,  which  in 
war  has  always  distinguished  our  soldiery,  and  in  peace,  beside  giv- 
ing fertility  to  our  stubborn  soil,  has  joined  the  advanced  guard  of 
civilization,  both  on  the  western  and  eastern  frontiers  of  the  Union. 
Another  incentive  to  this  policy  may  be  derived  from  the  reflection, 
that,  however  limited,  in  comparison  with  some  States,  may  appear 
our  present  wealth  and  numbers,  yet  we  are  richer  than  many  in  a 
mild  code  of  equal  laws ;  richer  in  systems  of  education,  literary  and 
religious ;  richer  in  the  frugality  and  morals  of  our  yeomanry ;  richer  in 


476  MESSAGE. 

improving  roads,  light  taxes,  and  a  healthy  climate ;  and,  if  the  senti- 
nels of  our  interests  persevere  in  a  policy  worthy  the  destinies  of  a 
free  State,  and  the  age  in  which  we  live,  the  tide  of  emigration  must 
long  be  checked.  Before  the  close  of  the  present  century,  should  our 
numbers  multiply  to  a  million,  the  increase  would  not  be  so  rapid  as 
has  occurred  here  within  the  last  hundred  years,  and  we  should  not 
then  exhibit  so  dense  a  population  as  now  covers  many  countries  of 
much  less  natural  fertility  in  Europe  and  Asia. 

Should  the  sanguine  also  anticipate  that  by  such  a  policy  the  char- 
acter of  this  population  for  every  human  excellence  may  surpass  that 
of  the  purest  republics  of  antiquity,  their  hopes  will  not  appear  alto- 
gether delusive,  if  we  look  to  the  advantages  just  enumerated,  to  the 
flood  of  light  pouring  upon  the  world  from  modern  science,  and  to 
those  benefits  from  the  diffusion  of  Christianity  which  exceed  all  ordi- 
nary calculation ;  or  if  we  reflect,  that  within  two  centuries  since  the 
axe  of  the  husbandman  was  first  heard  in  the  forests  of  this  State,  she 
has  risen  from  a  few  huts  on  her  sea-board,  and  from  foreign  and  feu- 
dal subjection,  to  the  full  enjoyment  of  independence ;  and,  after  con- 
verting her  wildernesses  into  fruitful  fields,  has  animated  them  with  a 
people  equally  able  to  understand  and  defend  their  inestimable  rights. 
Nor  is  there  danger  that  such  a  people  will  ever  cease  to  love  their 
laws  and  institutions,  so  long  as  these  continue  worthy  of  their  love, 
by  keeping  pace  with  the  progress  of  freedom  and  knowledge. 

Gentlemen  of  the  Senate,  and 

House  of  Representatives : 

I  trust  that  you  will  not  misinterpret  my  readiness  to  meet  every 
responsibility  belonging  to  the  executive  department,  and  my  use,  in 
all  communications  with  you,  of  that  plainness  and  frankness  which 
early  habits  and  opinions  teach  me  should  be  cultivated  between  the 
free  agents  of  a  free  people. 

To  expect  unanimity  of  sentiment  on  topics  so  diversified,  would  not 
be  warranted  by  experience ;  and  so  far  as  my  private  wishes  are  con- 
cerned, they  aspire  merely  to  obtain  credit  for  industry  and  fidelity, 
leaving  the  usefulness  of  every  suggestion  to  the  scrutiny  of  temper- 
ate discussion,  and  believing  that  a  temporary  difference  of  views  on 
subjects  of  legislation  may  be  entertained  with  honesty,  and  will  often 
tend  to  elicit  new  light,  and  promote  the  triumph  of  correct  prin- 
ciples. 

The  pressure  of  those  judicial  duties  which  have  engrossed  my 
attention  till  the  present  week  may  be  some  excuse  for  various  errors 
and  omissions  in  the  foregoing  remarks ;  and  my  regret  on  account  of 
them  is  much  lessened  by  the  reflection,  that  every  deficiency  can  be 
supplied  by  the  variety  of  talent,  the  experience,  and  wide  extent  of 
observation,  collected  in  the  Legislature. 

Suffer  me  only  to  add,  that  it  will  be  my  pride  to  imitate,  without 
presuming  to  hope  I  can  equal,  the  judicious  example  of  my  immedi- 


LAWS   CONCERNING   PAUPERS.  477 

ate  predecessors  in  their  general  course  of  administration,  and  in  their 
conciliatory  deportment  towards  the  different  sections,  sects,  parties, 
and  interests,  of  the  State.  A  broad  motive  for  the  latter  part  of  this 
policy  springs  from  the  fact,  that  liberality,  when  it  can  be  indulged 
with  no  sacrifice  of  principle,  proves  the  great  source  of  harmony  and 
strength  in  popular  governments;  and,  under  a  conviction  of  this 
truth,  the  venerable  author  of  the  Declaration  of  our  Independence 
long  since  inculcated  upon  the  whole  of  his  countrymen,  that,  as 
"  every  difference  of  opinion  is  not  a  difference  of  principle,"  it  becomes 
"  the  duty  of  all  good  citizens  to  unite  in  common  efforts  for  the  com- 
mon good."  LEVI  WOODBURY. 
Concord,  June  5, 1823. 


LAWS   CONCERNING  PAUPERS.* 


To  the  Honorable  the  Setiate  and  House  of  Representatives  for 
the  State  of  Neiv  Hampshire,  in  General  Court  convened. 

The  committee  appointed  at  your  last  session  to  report  concerning 
the  Pauper  Laws  of  this  State  would  respectfully  represent,  that  they 
have  endeavored  to  devote  such  attention  to  the  subject  as  its  acknowl- 
edged importance  deserves.  But  it  is  not  believed  necessary  to  detail, 
with  minuteness,  all  the  circumstances  which  have  influenced  them  in 
favor  of  the  changes  hereafter  recommended.  Many  of  those  circum- 
stances appear  among  the  facts  collected  by  the  last  Legislature,  from 
the  several  towns  in  the  State ;  many  of  them  exist  in  the  recorded 
experience  of  other  governments  under  similar  systems  of  poor  laws , 
and  many  of  them,  we  trust,  are  so  manifest  in  the  first  elements  of 
political  economy,  as  to  occur,  without  enumeration,  to  the  recollection 
of  all.  To  illustrate  the  views  of  your  committee,  however,  it  may  not 
be  improper  to  mention  a  few  general  considerations  derived  from  the 
above  sources. 

Our  laws  for  the  relief  of  paupers  are  evidently  founded  on  an  idea 
that  all  civil  associations  are  bound  to  furnish  protection  and  mainten- 

*  A  Report  made  to  the  Legislature  of  New  Hampshire,  June  9,  1821. 


478  LAWS  CONCERNING  PAUPERS. 

ance  to  the  individuals  of  such  associations.  This  idea,  in  a  limited 
sense,  is  correct.  But  experience  has  evinced,  that  though  govern- 
ment can,  in  most  cases,  provide  more  effectual  protection  than  sepa- 
rate individuals,  yet,  on  the  contrary,  it  has  no  less  clearly  evinced, 
that  each  separate  individual  can,  better  than  government,  provide  for 
his  own  maintenance.  As  a  general  principle,  therefore,  government 
should  furnish  only  that  indirect  aid  towards  the  support  of  individuals, 
which  consists  in  the  protection  of  them  while  acquiring  and  enjoying 
the  means  of  subsistence. 

The  support  of  those  persons  who,  through  debility  of  body  or  mind, 
are  unable  to  earn  a  livelihood,  forms  no  exception  to  this  general 
principle,  unless  experience  justifies  the  belief  that,  without  the  inter- 
position of  government,  such  persons  will  be  left  to  perish  by  individ- 
uals interested  in  their  fate  from  consanguinity,  or  friendship,  or 
humanity.  Because  the  nature  and  character  of  man  are  so  consti- 
tuted, that  if  this  interposition  be  made  when  not  necessary,  that  very 
circumstance  will  create  and  perpetuate  an  apology  for  the  continuance 
of  such  interpositions.  How  many  are  tempted  to  refrain  from  exer- 
tion to  support  themselves  and  their  indigent  dependants,  from  a  con- 
sciousness that,  without  such  exertion,  they  are  secure  of  a  mainten- 
ance by  the  public  !  On  the  contrary,  how  few,  who  are  not  entitled 
to  a  support  by  the  public,  will  endure  hunger  and  nakedness,  rather 
than  labor,  provided  they  possess  physical  ability  to  labor  !  Such, 
also,  is  the  mysterious  construction  of  the  human  heart,  that,  in  a  civ- 
ilized and  Christian  community,  only  a  small  number  can  be  found  so 
destitute  of  the  sympathies  of  our  race,  so  regardless  of  their  kindred, 
or  so  dead  to  the  religious  duty  of  charity,  as  to  see  perish  with  want 
their  offspring,  parents  or  friends,  if  those  connections  are  really 
impotent,  and  by  law  entitled  to  no  relief  from  the  prodigal  hand  of 
government. 

Thus  it  happened  in  modern  Europe,  till  about  the  middle  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  that  the  aid  of  government  in  support  of  paupers, 
was  neither  offered  nor  invoked.  That  class  of  persons  received  no 
regular  assistance,  except  from  monasteries ;  and  though  this  assist- 
ance was  voluntary,  from  mere  religious  charity,  yet,  instead  of  being 
too  limited,  in  its  profusion  was  often  a  temptation  to  indolence.  Most 
of  the  continent  of  Europe  is  still  without  any  civil  laws  for  the  main- 
tenance of  paupers.  Ought  a  supposition  to  be  indulged  so  deroga- 
tory to  this  reformed  section  of  the  world,  as  that  the  obligations  of 
the  Gospel  are  now  less  felt,  and  the  proper  objects  of  private  charity 
cannot  be  selected  with  as  much  intelligence,  and  with  even  better 
effects  on  community,  than  were  exhibited  in  ages  of  comparative 
barbarism  ? 

It  can  hardly  be  questioned,  then,  that  our  present  system  of  poor 
laws,  furnishing,  as  it  does,  public  and  permanent  relief  to  every 
description  of  paupers,  must  be  deemed  a  departure  from  some  of  the 
first  principles  of  political  economy.     In  one  respect,  it  violates,  also, 


LAWS   CONCERNING   PAUPERS.  479 

the  great  moral  distinctions  between  virtue  and  vice ;  because  it  yields 
the  same  aid  to  vicious  as  to  innocent  poverty.  In  other  words,  it 
does  not  punish  vice  by  the  abandonment  of  its  votaries  to  such  suf- 
fering as  would  naturally  follow  from  gross  wickedness ;  but  rescues 
from  want,  and  nourishes  with  as  much  kindness,  the  felon  and  drunk- 
ard, as  it  does  the  victim  of  disease  or  misfortune.  This  system,  too, 
was  in  some  degree  intended  to  produce  a  remedial  effect;  yet,  in 
hostility  to  such  a  design,  it  contains  within  itself  abundant  seeds  of 
increase  and  perpetuity.  No  regular  course  of  discipline  or  labor  is 
adopted,  in  order  to  reform  the  idle  and  vicious.  Improper  marriages 
are  contracted,  under  the  prospect  and  security  of  eventual  support 
from  the  public.  A  similar  foresight  encourages  many  others  to 
indulge  in  indolence,  prodigality  and  vice.  Distant  connections  are 
more  readily  flung  upon  the  public,  as  the  sympathies  of  kindred  and 
friends  become  more  paralyzed  by  the  increasing  weight  of  their  com- 
pulsory taxes  for  the  maintenance  of  other  paupers.  Indeed,  a  com- 
bination of  these  and  similar  causes,  under  the  present  system,  multi- 
plies the  whole  number  of  paupers  in  a  ratio  calculated  to  alarm  the 
most  courageous  politician.  For  a  confirmation  of  some  of  these 
remarks,  we  would  refer  to  the  facts  reported  to  the  last  Legislature. 
Those  facts,  too,  speak  a  language  which  outweighs  every  suggestion 
of  fancy  or  theory ;  and,  if  their  accuracy  were  questionable,  are  cor- 
roborated by  the  experience  of  every  government  that  has  adopted  a 
system  similar  to  our  own. 

Thus,  in  the  year  1800,  the  annual  expense  for  the  support  of  pau- 
pers, inhabitants  of  this  State,  was  only  about  $17,000,  and  our  pop- 
ulation was  183,858.  The  above  sum  does  not  include  incidental  and 
legal  cost.  But,  in  the  year  1820,  the  same  annual  expense  had 
increased  to  about  $80,000,  while  our  population  had  become  only 
244,161.  It  therefore  appears  that  our  expenses  increased  almost 
four  times  their  just  proportion  ;  for,  had  they  augmented  in  a  ratio 
with  the  population,  their  amount  would  have  been  less  than  $23,000, 
instead  of  $80,000.  The  facts  reported  to  the  Legislature  show  that 
these  expenses  double  in  about  every  five  years.  But,  on  a  recurrence 
to  the  census  of  different  periods,  it  will  be  seen  that  our  population 
doubles  only  in  about  forty  years.  The  population  of  this  State  has 
not  recently  received  many  accessions  from  abroad ;  while  the  depart- 
ure of  our  hardy  and  enterprising  youth  to  milder  climates  and  more 
lucrative  employments  than  exist  here,  has  been  a  constant  drain  upon 
our  productive  numbers,  without  draining  from  us,  at  the  same  time, 
the  infirm,  the  diseased  and  the  impotent.  It  has,  therefore,  followed, 
that  though  the  number  of  paupers  compared  with  our  whole  popula- 
tion was,  in  the  year  1800,  only  one  to  three  hundred  and  thirty, 
yet,  in  the  year  1820,  they  had  become  one  to  every  one  hundred. 
This  is  more  than  three  times  their  just  proportional  number ;  and 
though,  in  our  estimates,  we  have  rejected  fractions  and  obtained  the 
number  of  paupers  by  assuming  a  certain  sum  for  the  annual  support 


480  LAWS   CONCERNING   PAUPERS. 

of  each,  yet  the  comparative  result  must  be  accurate,  because  the 
same  rules  in  similar  estimates  are  preserved  throughout.  From  the 
facts  before  mentioned,  it  follows,  also,  that  should  the  number  of 
paupers,  and  of  our  whole  population,  continue  to  increase  in  this  dis- 
proportionate ratio  for  the  next  forty  years,  the  former  will  become 
one  to  every  twenty-seven  of  the  latter,  instead  of  only  one  to  every 
one  hundred.  Thus,  at  the  end  of  that  period,  our  population  will  be 
only  488,000,  while  our  paupers  will  be  18,000  ;  though  to  support 
18,000  then  with  the  same  ease  with  which  we  can  now  support  the 
present  number,  our  population  ought  to  be  2,196,000. 

These  calculations  are  predicated  on  the  hypothesis  that  our  paupers 
and  whole  population  will,  till  the  year  1860,  continue  to  increase  in 
a  ratio  similar  to  that  which  has  existed  since  the  years  1T90  and 
1800.  But  it  is  correct  reasoning,  as  well  as  history,  that  paupers, 
when  a  country  grows  older  and  taxes  augment,  will  multiply  in  an 
annually  increasing  ratio  with  the  population ;  and  that  a  people  under 
such  a  system,  like  a  heavy  body  descending  to  the  earth,  are  acceler- 
ated in  their  progress  towards  total  pauperism,  the  further  they  advance. 

The  above  number  of  paupers,  therefore,  at  the  end  of  forty  years, 
compared  with  the  whole  population,  is  estimated  much  too  low.  But, 
taking  only  the  actual  estimate,  such  a  system,  if  not  amended,  seems 
destined  to  entail  on  our  posterity  a  burthen  more  oppressive  than  the 
support  of  all  the  privileged  orders  of  monarchies,  from  which  we 
justly  boast  our  happy  exemption. 

That  these  apprehensions  do  not  rest  alone  upon  reasoning  and  cal- 
culation, may  be  seen  by  reference  to  the  adjoining  State  of  Massa- 
chusetts. Their  territory  has  been  longer  settled,  the  system  under- 
gone a  fuller  experiment;  and  the  result,  as  reported  to  their 
Legislature,  tends  to  verify  the  worst  predictions.  In  a  population  of 
about  472,000,  their  annual  pauper  expenses  are  estimated  at 
$364,000,  which,  it  will  be  seen,  is  more  than  double  the  amount  of 
our  expenses  compared  with  our  population.  Thus,  too,  the  number 
of  paupers  is  there  estimated  at  one  to  every  sixty-six  inhabitants, 
whereas  here  it  does  not  exceed  one  to  every  one  hundred.  If  their 
census  of  A.  D.  1820  were  taken  as  a  guide,  the  result  would  differ, 
but  only  in  a  small  degree. 

The  experience  under  this  system  of  poor  laws  has,  in  England, 
been  longer  still;  and  the  result  has,  if  possible,  been  still  more  conclu- 
sive in  respect  to  its  ruinous  progress.  From  the  year  1687  to  1785, 
a  period  of  almost  a  century,  their  annual  pauper  expenses  increased 
from  £665,362  to  only  .£1,943,649;  while  from  1785  to  1815,  a 
period  of  but  thirty  years,  they  increased  from  £1,943,649  to 
£8,000,000.  Thus,  during  the  infancy  of  the  system,  the  expenses 
did  not  treble  in  less  than  a  century ;  but,  afterwards,  they  quadrupled 
in  less  than  a  third  of  a  century.  The  same  disheartening  conse- 
quences are  visible  when  the  number  of  their  paupers  is  compared 
with  their  whole  population.     Thus,  in  the  year  1803,  the  whole 


LAWS  CONCERNING  PAUPERS.  481 

number  of  paupers  in  England  and  Wales  had  swollen  to  1,039,716. 
and  the  whole  population  was  only  9,500,000.  The  ratio  of  one 
pauper  to  about  every  ten  inhabitants  is,  when  compared  with  that  in 
New  Hampshire,  and  even  in  Massachusetts,  an  appalling  increase. 
But  what  ought  to  be  our  consternation  at  the  progress  of  the  system, 
when,  in  1812,  a  period  of  only  nine  years,  their  paupers  had  multi- 
plied from  1,039,716  to  2,079,432,  and  their  population  risen  only  to 
10,000,000 !  This  presents  a  ratio  of  more  than  one  pauper  to  every 
five  inhabitants. 

Let  all  deductions  be  made  which  can  occur  to  the  most  cautious 
economist, — and  undoubtedly  some  are  proper  in  consequence  of  the 
depreciation  of  money,  the  unusual  duration  of  their  modern  wars,  and 
the  peculiar  embarrassments  which  have  distressed  manufactures, — and 
still  the  result  will  be  such  as  to  indicate  a  fatal  termination  to  every 
government  which  persists  in  the  system.  It  is  to  be  remembered, 
also,  that  the  expenses  incurred  in  the  support  of  foreign  paupers  —  by 
which  we  mean  those  who  have  acquired  no  legal  settlement  in  this 
State  —  constitute  a  very  considerable  addition  to  the  sums  first  men- 
tioned. Among  us  those  expenses  have  been  estimated  at  $6200  a 
year ;  and  the  observation  of  every  one  must  confirm  the  remark,  that 
they  are  incurred  with  less  reluctance  and  with  more  prodigality  than 
any  other  expenses  under  the  present  system.  Much  of  this  arises 
from  the  circumstance  that  they  are  eventually  paid  by  the  counties, 
and  not  by  the  towns,  which  furnish  the  relief.  The  expenses  of  this 
description,  too,  increase  in  a  ratio  almost  as  rapid  as  those  for  the 
maintenance  of  domestic  paupers.  In  this  State,  the  accounts  for  any 
length  of  time  have  not  been  collected  from  the  several  county  treas- 
uries; but  an  imperfect  examination  of  them  strongly  verifies  the 
above  conjecture. 

In  Massachusetts,  under  similar  laws,  these  expenses,  between  the 
years  1801  and  1810,  have  increased  from  $27,363  to  $50,542 ;  and, 
in  1820,  had  become  $79,870  a  year.  These  sums,  too,  may  be 
deemed  another  proof  of  the  disproportionate  magnitude,  in  older  gov- 
ernments, of  both  the  number  and  expenses  of  paupers.  For  though 
the  extended  sea-board  and  commerce  of  that  State  may  create  a 
peculiar  increase  of  the  class  of  foreign  paupers,  yet,  compared  with 
their  population,  it  could  hardly  make  them,  to  the  number  here,  com- 
pared with  our  population,  as  thirteen  to  four. 

In  addition  to  the  sums  before  enumerated,  which  are  expended  in 
the  mere  maintenance  of  both  foreign  and  domestic  paupers,  the  inci- 
dental expenses  of  removals,  and  the  costs  which  accompany  litigation 
concerning  settlements,  constitute  items  whose  formidable  amount 
none  could  anticipate  or  believe,  without  much  observation.  In  this 
State  they  have  been  estimated  at  $30,000  a  year.  This,  it  will  be 
perceived,  more  than  equals  one-third  of  the  whole  expenses  for  mere 
maintenance.  When  we  advert  to  the  time,  trouble  and  expenditures, 
of  overseers  and  agents,  in  inquiries  concerning  the  settlement  of 
41 


482  LAWS  CONCERNING  PAUPERS. 

paupers, —  in  the  relief,  removal  and  superintendence  of  them, — in  the 
institution  of  suits,  the  service  of  notices,  the  procurement  of  evidence, 
the  fees  to  counsel  and  witnesses,  —  the  attendance  on  courts  and  the 
raising  of  money  to  discharge  enormous  bills  of  cost  recovered, — few  will 
apprehend  that  the  above  estimate  is  much  too  high.  It  seems  proba- 
ble, too,  that  the  same  alarming  increase  which  characterizes  the  other 
expenses  under  this  system  is  attendant  on  these.  For,  in  England, 
where  questions  of  settlement  have  been  longer  adjudicated  and  fixed, 
and  where  these  incidental  expenses  should  therefore  be  proportion- 
ably  small,  there  has  still  been  a  great  increase  in  their  ratio,  com- 
pared with  the  whole  pauper  tax.  Thus,  in  the  year  1783,  their 
whole  expenses,  beside  those  for  maintenance,  were  .£92,097.  Of 
these,  the  mere  law  charges  were  £55,891,  and  the  charges  attendant 
on  removals,  £24,493.  But  in  the  year  1803,  out  of  the  whole 
pauper  tax,  which  exceeded  £5,000,000,  only  a  little  over  £4,000,000 
was  expended  in  mere  maintenance.  It  therefore  appears,  that  as  in 
1783  the  whole  pauper  tax  was  about  £1,500,000,  the  incidental 
and  legal  expenses  were  then  less  than  one-fifteenth  of  the  whole ;  but 
in  1803  they  had  become  one-fifth  of  the  whole. 

From  a  view  of  the  whole  premises,  it  must  be  obvious,  that  though 
the  pauper  expenses  of  this  State  are  nominally  much  less  than  those 
of  some  other  governments,  yet  the  same  disastrous  increase,  which 
we  believe  to  be  inseparable  from  the  present  system,  is  here  exhibited. 

It  is  fashionable  to  lament  the  condition  of  England  in  respect  to 
pauperism ;  and  it  is  flattering  to  our  national  vanity,  when  we  com- 
pare the  sum  total  of  her  poor  to  our  own,  —  her  three  millions  of 
famished  beggars,  fed  from  the  hand  of  public  charity,  —  a  number 
equal  to  one-third  of  the  population  of  the  whole  United  States ;  and 
when  we  compare,  also,  her  annual  expense  in  their  support,  of  above 
$44,000,000,  —  a  sum  more  than  double  the  whole  revenue  of  the 
Union.  But  we  forget,  at  the  same  time,  to  compare  our  small  popu- 
lation and  resources  with  hers ;  and  though  the  insulated  position  of 
this  State,  the  enterprise  and  industry  of  her  inhabitants,  their 
general  intelligence  and  correct  morals,  may  long  avert  the  catastrophe 
which  seems  more  immediately  to  menace  England,  yet  the  same 
system  of  pauper  laws  seems  to  hurry  us  towards  the  same  vortex. 

Every  reflecting  mind  in  society  has,  therefore,  become  alarmed ; 
and  it  is  believed  by  the  committee  that  the  facts  and  inferences 
which  they  have  the  honor  to  present  to  the  attention  of  the  Legisla- 
ture will  evince  the  necessity  of  some  such  speedy  change  in  the 
system  as  may  check  this  overwhelming  increase  of  expenses,  and,  if 
possible,  reduce  their  present  formidable  amount. 

Only  three  methods  to  effect  this  have  occurred  to  us.  One  is  by 
lessening  the  number  of  paupers  who  by  law  may  be  authorized  to 
receive  public  relief.  Another  is,  by  lessening  the  annual  expense  of 
maintaining  each  person  entitled  to  relief.  And  lastly,  by  lessening 
the  incidental  expense  of  maintenance,  and  of  litigation  concerning 


LAWS   CONCERNING   PAUPERS.  483 

settlements.  It  will  be  seen  that  these  three  propositions  are  so 
independent  of  each  other,  that  the  adoption  or  rejection  of  either  will 
not  affect  the  remainder.  On  the  means  to  enforce  each  of  them  Aye 
shall  take  the  liberty  to  offer  some  suggestions. 

1.  The  number  of  paupers,  that  are  now  so  iburthensome  a  tax  on 
community,  might  be  most  effectually  lessened  by  an  exclusion  of  every 
class  of  them  from  any  public  relief.  But  the  policy  of  such  a  meas- 
ure is  exposed  to  much  suspicion.  Whatever  may  be  its  theoretical 
correctness,  and  however  fortunate  may  have  been  the  experiments 
under  it  in  Scotland,  and  many  other  enlightened  portions  of  Europe, 
the  measure  seems  impracticable  to  many  who  have  so  long  been  accus- 
tomed to  our  present  system.  There  is,  too,  an  apparent  cruelty  in 
it,  which,  with  some,  may  not  be  obviated  by  the  considerations  men- 
tioned in  the  commencement  of  this  report.  All  changes,  also,  in  long- 
established  systems,  are  more  acceptable,  and  often  more  useful,  if 
gradual.  Your  committee,  however,  have  been  unable  to  discover  any 
sound  objection  to  the  exclusion  from  public  relief  of  every  person 
reduced  to  want  by  indolence  or  extravagance.  The  exclusion 
should,  likewise,  be  extended  to  all  those  whose  poverty  is  the  conse- 
quence of  any  crime.  This  class  forms  a  large  portion  of  the  whole 
number,  and  its  ranks  are  almost  wholly  filled  from  the  haunts  of 
intemperance.  The  abandoned  mothers  of  illegitimate  children  make 
up  a  great  part  of  the  residue.  Their  wretched  offspring,  with  whose 
support  the  public  are  now  so  often  burthened,  would  be  lessened  in 
number,  and  indemnity  be  obtained  for  most  hereafter  born,  if  select- 
men were  empowered  and  required,  in  the  name  of  their  respective 
towns,  to  prosecute  either  parent  till  that  indemnity  was  obtained. 
When  the  supposed  father  was  prosecuted,  the  mother,  like  every  com- 
petent witness,  might  then  be  compelled  to  testify  in  an  action  in 
which  she  is  not  a  party.  In  all  cases,  also,  of  children,  illegitimate 
or  otherwise,  whose  parents  ask  public  relief,  selectmen  should  be  more 
rigidly  enjoined  to  bind  them  out  to  substantial  farmers  and  mechan- 
ics, so  that  such  children  may  learn  industry  and  economy,  receive 
moral  instruction,  and  acquire  good  English  educations.  Many  would 
thus  be  rescued  from  the  necessity,  too  often  imposed  on  them  by  early 
habits  of  indolence  and  profligacy,  by  ignorance  and  infamy,  to  con- 
tinue paupers  for  life,  and  to  perpetuate  through  succeeding  genera- 
tions a  race  so  baneful  to  community. 

2.  In  respect  to  the  annual  expense  of  the  mere  maintenance  of 
those  paupers  who  may  by  law  be  authorized  to  receive  relief,  we 
entertain  no  doubt  that  it  might  greatly  be  lessened  by  the  employment 
of  them,  according  to  their  ability,  on  farms  and  in  workshops.  These 
should  be  owned  by  the  respective  towns ;  or,  where  paupers  are  few, 
by  voluntary  associations  of  contiguous  towns.  In  some  parts  of  this 
State,  and  in  many  parts  of  Massachusetts,  it  has  been  ascertained,  by 
actual  experiment,  that  much  the  most  profitable  labor  for  this  class 
of  persons,  when  not  totally  helpless,   is  agriculture.     Every  man, 


484  LAWS  CONCERNING  PAUPERS. 

who  has  watched  the  expenditure  of  public  money,  must  be  conscious 
that  when  such  employment  is  furnished  by  only  one  or  a  few  towns, 
the  incidental  cost  will  be  less,  the  attention  to  frugality  greater,  and 
the  risk  of  imposition  small.  As  idleness,  too,  is  the  parent  of  much 
pauperism,  constant  labor  being  thus  furnished  and  required  will  not 
only  often  cure  the  evil,  but  operate  as  a  preventive.  The  certainty 
of  being  compelled  to  work  will  induce  many  sturdy  paupers  to  sup- 
port themselves  voluntarily ;  and  those  who  are  willing  to  work,  but 
unable  to  obtain  employment,  will  thus  be  provided  with  opportunities 
to  earn  a  subsistence.  When  the  poor,  as  is  often  practised,  are  bil- 
letted  around  a  town  to  the  lowest  bidder,  few  of  them  feel  much  obli- 
gation to  labor ;  and  no  person  is,  under  the  present  system,  invested 
with  authority  to  enforce  their  obedience.  Every  one,  too,  who  con- 
sents to  board  them  cheap,  might  not  be  a  discreet  person  to  invest  with 
such  authority;  and  suitable  occupation,  in  many  different  families, 
could  not  always  be  supplied.  All  relief,  likewise,  to  paupers  in  their 
own  houses,  except  in  cases  of  accident,  has  been  found,  by  experience, 
to  be  the  most  expensive,  as  well  as  the  most  tempting  to  habitual 
indolence. 

3.  The  only  effectual  method  that  we  can  devise,  to  lessen  the  inci- 
dental expense  and  legal  cost  which  attend  our  present  system,  is  by  a 
repeal  of  all  laws  in  respect  to  settlement.  This  suggestion  may  not 
meet  with  favor,  on  account  of  its  novelty.  But,  as  the  expenses  of 
this  description  are  enormous,  and  do  not  contribute  to  the  actual 
maintenance  of  a  single  pauper,  almost  any  project  to  escape  from 
them  deserves  an  experiment.  On  the  hypothesis  that  every  person 
who  was  authorized  to  receive  public  relief  should  receive  it  at  both 
the  immediate  and  eventual  expense  of  the  town  which  bestows  it,  our 
vast  expenditures  in  removals  and  in  litigation  would  at  once  be 
eradicated ;  and  the  only  plausible  objection  to  such  a  course  is  the 
avenue  it  may  open  to  frauds,  and  the  disproportionate  burthen  it 
may  impose  on  different  towns.  But  cannot  the  Legislature  inflict 
such  severe  penalties  on  the  transportation  of  paupers,  by  force  or 
fraud,  from  one  town  to  another,  as  will  check  most  offences  of  that 
character  ?  In  addition  to  their  severity,  a  certainty  that  so  many  will 
feel  interested  to  enforce  them  by  prosecutions,  must  prevent  much 
transgression.  Mere  vagrant  beggary,  also,  will  not  greatly  increase, 
if  punished  by  apprehension  and  confinement  to  labor ;  and  it  always 
should  be  so  punished,  because  whoever  is  able  to  "compass  heaven 
and  earth  "  to  importune  others,  is  able  to  work  himself.  But  should 
it,  contrary  to  our  expectations,  considerably  increase,  the  public 
expenditures  in  removals  and  litigation  would  still  be  saved,  and  those 
for  maintenance  will  not  be  augmented,  as  the  change  will  only  be  in 
the  form  of  relief.  Persons  from  other  States,  who  become  paupers, 
could  then,  as  now,  be  sent  home,  if  their  infirmities  permitted,  and 
the  distance  was  small.  In  respect  to  the  relative  burthen  on  each 
town,  it  would  not,  in  a  series  of  years,  exhibit  any  essential  difference 


MARTIAL   LAW.  485 

from  the  burthen  imposed  by  our  present  laws.  On  the  contrary,  the 
proportion  now  is  so  diversified,  that,  after  a  repeal  of  those  laws,  the 
equality  would  probably  be  greater.  This  repeal,  too,  beside  the  pre- 
vention of  incidental  and  legal  cost,  would  effect  an  improvement  in 
the  general  economy  of  towns  in  the  management  of  the  poor.  To 
check  the  voluntary  incursion  of  paupers  from  other  places,  towns 
would  furnish  a  maintenance  no  more  sumptuous  than  necessity 
required,  and,  for  the  same  purpose,  would  compel  the  poor  to  perform 
all  the  labor  their  ability  might  permit.  It  is  obvious  that  these  indi- 
rect consequences,  by  lessening  the  annual  expenses  of  mere  mainten- 
ance, will  be  almost  as  useful  to  the  public  as  the  direct  consequences 
before  mentioned. 

Should  a  total  repeal  of  our  laws  in  respect  to  settlement  be  deemed 
inexpedient,  these  incidental  and  legal  expenses  might  possibly  be 
reduced,  by  greater  difficulty  in  the  methods  to  obtain  future  settle- 
ments ;  and,  possibly,  by  the  organization  of  a  cheaper  tribunal  than 
courts  of  law  to  adjudicate  upon  pauper  questions. 

But  on  these  points  no  improved  system  has  been  matured  by  us : 
and,  after  much  reflection,  we  doubt  whether  any  change,  short  of  a 
total  repeal,  would  effect  a  very  sensible  reduction  of  this  class  of 
expenses. 

All  which  is  respectfully  submitted. 

LEVI  WOODBURY, 
THOMAS  WHIPPLE,  Jun. 

June  9,  1821. 


MARTIAL   LAW.* 

The  chair  called  the  committee  to  order,  and  directed  that  the  bill 
of  rights  should  first  be  read  through,  and  afterwards  be  read  by 
clauses. 

[The  bill  of  rights  was  here  read.] 

Article  34  reads  thus  : 

"  No  person  can,  in  any  case,  be  subjected  to  law  martial,  or  to  any  pains  or  pen- 
alties by  virtue  of  that  law,  except  those  employed  in  the  army  or  navy,  and  except 
the  military  in  actual  service,  but  by  authority  of  the  Legislature." 

*  A  speech  made  in  convention  to  amend  the  constitution  of  New  Hampshire,  1850, 
against  the  power  to  declare  martial  law- 

41* 


486  PROTESTANT  TEST  FOR  HOLDING   OFFICES. 

Judge  Woodbury  moved  to  strike  out  "  but  by  authority  of  the  Legis- 
lature," which,  he  said,  authorized  the  Legislature  to  apply  the  law  mar- 
tial to  citizens  in  private  life ;  and  he  would  allow  no  Legislature  to  apply 
to  him  the  cat,  at  the  drum's  head.  This  could  not  be  done  without  abol- 
ishing the  whole  constitution ;  and  the  power  was  not  necessary.  It  would 
not  be  tolerated,  except  in  cases  of  war ;  and  scarcely  then,  even  in  the 
army.  He  spoke  of  the  law  martial  separate  from  the  military  code. 
The  fact  was,  there  was  no  law  martial.  It  was  no  law.  It  was  a 
contempt  of  law.  If  we  ever  get  into  such  a  state  of  society  that  any 
man  must  be  tried  at  the  drum-head  by  a  court  martial,  the  founda- 
tion of  society  was  broken  up.  This  power  belonged  to  the  General 
Government  in  time  of  war,  if  anywhere ;  but  they  had  never  dreamed 
of  applying  the  law  martial  to  persons  in  civil  and  private  life. 

The  motion  prevailed  unanimously. 


PROTESTANT  TEST  FOR  HOLDING  OFFICES.* 

Being  opposed  to  the  test,  that  some  of  our  principal  offices  shall 
not  be  filled  except  by  persons  of  the  Protestant  religion,  I  ask  leave 
to  offer  a  few  reasons  for  it.  I  do  it  quite  as  much  to  vindicate  our 
fathers  in  part  for  inserting  it,  as  myself  for  resisting  it.  Constitu- 
tions, it  is  conceded,  ought  to  be  durable  instruments,  being  the  great 
fundamental  laws  passed  by  the  people,  and  lasting  at  times,  as  ours 
has,  without  a  shadow  of  a  change,  for  half  a  century ;  yet  I  am  willing, 
when  a  provision  like  this  becomes  hostile  to  the  tolerant  spirit  of 
the  age  and  a  more  enlightened  public  opinion,  to  expunge  it  at  once 
from  our  system  of  government.  I  do  this,  too,  the  more  readily  at 
the  present  moment,  in  order  to  present  another  illustration  to  the 
world  how  easily  laws,  and  even  constitutions,  where  objectionable,  can 
be  changed  and  rechanged  in  this  free  country,  without  a  resort  to  vio- 
lence, and  to  measures  treasonable  to  public  liberty,  and  the  safety,  as 
well  as  best  interest,  of  our  blessed  Union.  Nor  is  it  that  I  oppose 
religion,  but  support  it.     I  am  neither  deistic  nor  innovating  rashly. 

On  a  little  examination,  it  will  be  found  that  this  test  crept  into  the 
constitution  originally  under  a  temporary  impulse,  and  without  having 

*  A  speech  made  in  State  convention  to  amend  the  constitution  of  New  Hampshire, 
1850,  against  religious  tests  for  holding  office. 


PROTECTANT   TEST  FOR  HOLDING   OFFICES.  487 

any  influence  on  the  affairs  of  the  State  practically,  as  they  then  stood. 
This  is  the  vindication  of  our  fathers. 

Tradition  says — and  I  probably  had  it,  in  early  life,  from  the  vener- 
able parent  of  the  member  from  Epping  (Mr.  Plumer), — that  parent, 
the  Nestor  of  the  politicians  of  that  generation,  and  sole  survivor  of 
the  convention  of  1791  —  that  the  provision  was  inserted,  in  1784,  to 
repel  taunts  which  had  been  flung  out  by  some,  after  the  Trench  alli- 
ance, that  there  was  to  be  an  alliance  also  with  the  French  religion, 
and  the  establishment  of  it  here.  The  provision  fell  then  still-born, — 
so  few  Catholics  existed  in  the  State.  But,  in  1791,  the  impropriety 
of  retaining  it  on  principle  became  so  manifest,  that  after  one  or  two 
ineffectual  efforts,  the  convention  voted  to  erase  it,  and  a  majority  of 
the  people  concurred  with  them ;  yet  not  being  quite  two-thirds,  the 
provision  remained,  though  against  the  will  of  a  decided  majority. 

The  principle  of  the  test  was  even  then  so  odious,  that,  as  Catholics 
increased  since  in  the  State,  from  a  mere  handful,  another  convention 
would,  I  think,  long  ere  this,  have  been  called  for  expunging  this 
alone,  had  they  become  numerous,  or  had  the  test  been  much  more 
than  a  brutum  fulmen,  or  used  practically  to  oppress  them.  If  any 
soreness  against  Catholic  persecutions  of  the  Puritans  abroad  mingled 
with  this,  and  rendered  prejudices  stronger  with  some  against  erasing 
the  test,  they  ought,  for  more  recent  persecution  by  Laud  and  the 
Episcopalians  in  England,  to  have  excluded  them  also.  But  it  was 
right  to  exclude  neither.  Now,  under  more  auspicious  circumstances, 
we  have,  and  I  trust  will  improve,  the  opportunity  to  do  justice  to  all. 
There  is  now  no  dread  of  French  influence,  or  French  religion.  The 
rights  of  all  Christians  at  least  to  equal  freedom  and  power  in  our  sys- 
tem of  government  have  become  a  practical  question,  and  should,  of 
course,  be  settled  on  broad,  enlightened  and  humane  principles.  Fifty 
years,  with  their  discussions  and  researches  and  experiments,  have 
poured  a  flood  of  light  over  the  true  nature  of  liberty  of  conscience,  and 
all  its  great  safeguards.  Let  us,  then,  do  what  our  fathers  themselves 
would,  if  now  living,  under  increased  light  and  experience. 

How  does  the  question  stand,  under  republican  principles  of  govern- 
ment ?  By  them,  constitutions  and  laws  are  made  more  to  protect 
rights  than  confer  them.  They  are  made  for  protecting  liberty,  equal- 
ity, conscience,  property  and  life,  rather  than  to  give  most  of  these, 
or  to  establish  any  particular  set  of  religious  opinions.  This  is  not 
that  religion  is  a  minor  concern,  and  not,  in  some  view,  the  greatest  for 
an  immortal  being,  but  rather  that  religion  is  a  concern  between  God 
and  man,  and  seldom  to  be  interfered  with  by  governments.  Such 
intolerant  interference  has  caused  oceans  of  blood  to  flow,  and  millions 
to  perish  at  the  stake ;  and  was  one  of  the  great  causes  which  expelled 
our  fathers  to  a  wilderness,  and  the  mercy  of  savage  foes.  The  repub- 
lican government  afterwards  established  here  should,  if  true  to  repub- 
lican principles,  shield  all  in  their  religious  tenets,  while  conducting 
peacefully,  and  protect  all  in  their  pursuits  and  worship,  however 


488  PROTESTANT   TEST   FOR   HOLDING   OFFICES. 

different,  while  acting  as  good  citizens  ;  or  it  becomes  suicidal,  and,  like 
despotism,  persecutes  differences  of  opinions,  and  introduces  the  gross- 
est irregularities. 

How  does  the  question  stand,  on  the  principles  of  our  bill  of  rights  1 

It  is  forced  to  admit  that  each  sect  should  enjoy,  and  it  does  now 
enjoy  here,  the  privilege  to  hold  property.  If  to  hold  that,  why  not 
to  protect  it  by  laws,  which  each  helps  to  make  ?  It  concedes  to  each 
sect  the  right  to  sue  for  injuries  to  character,  for  injuries  to  children 
and  wife,  and  to  worship  God  in  freedom.  Why  not,  then,  let  them 
aid  in  legislating  to  protect  all  these  ?  You  hold  out  the  husk,  but 
withdraw  the  kernel.  You  allow  fire-arms,  but  neither  gunpowder 
nor  lead,  to  load  them  and  make  them  effective.  In  the  bill  of  rights 
you  pledge,  also,  to  all  sects,  equality ;  but  afterwards,  by  this  test,  you 
make  all  but  Protestants  unequal.  You  promise  entire  freedom  of 
conscience  to  all,  and  treat  it  in  the  fourth  article  as  so  high  a  privi- 
lege as  not  to  be  in  any  way  alienable,  and  yet  you  leave  others 
than  Protestants  defenceless  as  to  it,  by  disfranchising  them  from  filling 
offices  to  secure  it  by  legislation. 

It  is  contrary  to  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  and  of  the  very 
first  article  in  your  bill  of  rights,  declaring  all  men  equal.  You  do 
not  thus  give  to  all  men  equal  privileges.  It  is,  also,  in  the  teeth  of 
the  same  bill  of  rights,  to  say  one  sect  shall  not  be  subordinate  to 
another,  and  still  disfranchise  one,  or  let  one  hold  offices  forbidden  to 
others.  It  is  likewise  contrary  to  all  sound  experience  and  reason,  to 
say,  as  we  do,  that  Catholics  may  vote,  but  not  be  voted  for ;  and  that 
they  may  be  well  competent  for  one  duty,  and  not  the  other.  So  it  is 
inconsistent  to  say,  as  we  do,  that  they  may  be  jurors  or  judges,  yet 
not  legislators ;  or  agree,  as  we  do  in  the  constitution  of  the  Union,  that 
Catholics  may  be  fit  and  safe  for  members  of  Congress,  senators,  cab- 
inet officers, — yea,  presidents, — and  yet  denounce  them  as  unfit  and 
unsafe  at  home  to  represent  one  hundred  and  fifty  polls  in  one  of  our 
small  townships.  It  is,  in  truth,  much  like  the  great  grievance  which 
led  to  our  Revolution, — taxation  without  representation.  All  other 
than  Protestant  sects  are  virtually  deprived  of  representation,  as  they 
are  made  ineligible  to  the  Legislature.  Their  opinions  and  wishes  are 
unheard  there  from  themselves.  They  are  branded.  They  are  driven 
forth  as  with  the  mark  of  Cain,  for  servitude  and  ignominy. 

Why  not  as  well  explicitly  say — and  not  do  it  covertly — that  none 
but  Protestants  are  fit  for  a  republic  ?  Why  not  say  that  Catholic 
Maryland  is  unfit?  Catholic  Ireland?  Catholic  France?  Why 
halt  at  half-way  measures'?  Why  not  say  it  is  a  mere  creed  in 
religious  faith,  and  not  the  mind,  heart,  morals,  which  render  men 
suitable  for  self-government  ?  Or,  that  we  establish  government  for 
the  former  alone,  and  not  to  secure  liberty,  character,  property  and 
life? 

Indeed,  this  test  debars  man  from  what  we  allow  to  the  degraded 
African,  as  he  is  eligible  here  to  hold  office,  as  well  as  to  vote.     It 


PROTESTANT   TEST   FOR  HOLDING    OFFICES.  489 

seems  often  to  have  been  overlooked,  likewise,  that  these  tests  are 
restraints  or  chains  on  those  who  make  them,  as  well  as  on  others. 
The  Protestant  himself  cannot  now  vote  here  for  a  Catholic,  any  more 
than  a  Catholic  can  vote  for  one,  though  the  candidate  may  be,  on  all 
hands,  confessedly  the  best  qualified  man  for  State  representative, 
senator  or  governor. 

If  urged  that  the  power  to  make  such  tests  in  constitutions  exists,  it 
is  no  more  an  argument  for  the  moral  and  political  right  to  do  it,  than 
it  is,  because  we  have  the  naked  power,  that  we  have  also  the  moral 
and  political  right,  to  unite  church  and  State,  create  an  inquisition,  or, 
having  stripped  other  sects  of  the  privilege  to  hold  office,  to  go  further, 
and  rob  them  of  equal  rights  to  earth,  air,  fire  and  water,  and  the  same 
hopes  and  means  for  happiness,  both  in  time  and  eternity.  One  pro- 
fession alone  in  business  might,  on  a  like  ground,  be  admitted  to  sit  in 
the  Legislature,  such  as  merchants  or  lawyers.  While  the  present  test 
continues,  it  is  with  an  ill-grace  we  can  call  other  countries  bigoted, 
who,  like  England,  have  emancipated  the  Catholics,  and  made  contri- 
butions for  their  education.  All  the  former  fears,  as  to  their  numbers 
or  political  principles,  have  now  become  groundless.  In  most  Catholic 
countries,  Jesuitism  is  banished,  and  the  inquisition  abolished,  and  the 
Pope  himself  has  become  quite  a  reformer  and  republican ;  and  Catho- 
lics generally  are  not  believed,  in  morals  or  the  religious  sentiment,  to 
be  behind  the  age,  or  the  true  standard  for  public  liberty.  What  other 
sect  shall  throw  at  them  the  first  stone  1  What  one  vindicate  the 
present  exclusion,  and  not  admit  that,  if  other  than  Protestant  sects 
had  a  majority  here,  these  last  should  not  also  be  stripped  of  power ; 
and  that  our  ancestors'  complaints  of  penalties  and  disfranchisements 
were  ill-founded  1  It  is  doing  what  we  have  always  censured  in  others. 
The  error  is,  that  this  exclusion  concedes,  in  principle,  that  religion  is 
to  be  regulated  by  a  majority,  rather  than  the  sincere  conviction  and 
conscience  of  each  individual ;  or,  that  only  certain  sects  are  moral  and 
intelligent  enough  to  exercise  political  power,  which  is  fallacious  and 
false,  under  our  systems  of  free  schools  and  universal  education ;  or, 
that  reason  and  Providence  cannot  uphold  correct  principles,  without 
our  feeble  aid  and  our  proscriptions ;  and  that  Deity,  or  his  adorable 
Son,  need  persecution  of  some  sects  to  sustain  and  render  triumphant 
pure  religion.  So,  if  it  be  insisted  that  one  denomination  must  be 
better  and  more  trustworthy  than  the  rest, — which  may  as  well  be 
done,  even  among  Protestants, — why  not  trust  to  that  one  alone,  and 
proscribe  all  the  rest,  though  Protestant  ?  Which  shall  be  that  special 
favorite  1     So,  which  one  profession  shall,  under  a  like  system,  rule  1 

What  sect  do  Sidney,  or  Locke,  or  Jefferson,  or  Madison,  think  fit  to 
be  trusted  with  legislative  power  ?  How  is  this,  too,  in  our  neighbor- 
ing republics  ?  Do  they  thus  ostracize  a  part  ?  On  the  contrary, 
they  had  the  experience  of  the  Revolution  to  aid  them,  by  the  Catho- 
lic Carrols  and  Lafayettes,  being  moral  and  brave  as  the  most  Puri- 
tanical ;  and  many  others  of  that  creed  have  fought  side  by  side  with 


490  PROPERTY   TEST. 

us  since,  at  Chippewa  and  Bridgewater,  and  under  the  walls  of  Mex- 
ico, and  shown  that  their  creed  is  not  deserving  proscription.  In 
short,  without  going  further  into  the  question  now,  it  seems,  to  my 
mind,  not  only  unjust  to  other  sects,  but  not  reputable  to  us  as  a  peo- 
ple, or  to  the  age  in  which  we  live,  to  retain  this  test  longer.* 


PROPERTY  TEST.f 


The  property  test,  in  our  constitution,  extends  to  State  representa- 
tives, senators  and  governor.  Property  is  also  the  basis  of  the 
districts  for  the  election  of  senators.  I  am  against  the  whole.  But 
I  shall  now  confine  myself  to  the  recapitulation  of  a  few  reasons  why, 
in  my  opinion,  property  should  not  be  made  a  test  qualification  for  fill- 
ing those  legislative  offices.  It  is  not  that  I  am  hostile  to  property, 
or  rashly  radical,  but  would  set  ourselves  and  myself  right  before  the 
world.  In  the  first  place,  the  theory  of  our  government  is  not,  like 
that  of  some,  founded  on  property,  but  rather  on  population,  and  intel- 
ligence, and  morals.  It  is  mind,  and  not  dead  matter,  which  is  to  rule. 
Nor  is  any  republic  to  be  sustained  merely  by  money  or  land,  but  by 
"men,  high-minded  men,  who  know  their  rights,  and,  knowing,  dare 
maintain."  It  is  to  be  sustained  by  virtue,  knowledge,  fidelity  to  the 
constitution  and  laws,  till  duly  altered,  and  not  by  speechless  idols  and 
senseless  earth.  But  it  has  been  argued  elsewhere  that  the  rich  are 
better  qualified  to  fill  offices.  But,  by  our  system  of  free  schools, 
intelligence  and  sound  morals  are  diffused  among  the  poor,  no  less  than 
the  rich ;  and  hence,  those  without  much  property  are  often  as  well 
educated  for  the  duties  of  public  life  as  the  wealthy. 

The  former  are  not,  as  in  some  quarters  of  the  world,  serfs  or  laza- 
roni,  and  fit  materials  for  mobs,  and  insurrections  against  law  and  order, 

*  Mr.  Kavanagh,  recently  Governor  of  Maine,  and  Mr.  Taney,  Chief-justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  Avere  Catholics. 

t  A  speech  made  in  State  convention  to  amend  the  constitution  of  New  Hampshire, 
1850,  against  the  property  qualification  for  holding  office. 


PROPERTY  TEST.  491 

but  fitted,  by  industry,  religion,  and  acquirements,  to  give  security  to 
society,  and  to  protect  well  the  rights  and  liberties  of  all.  It  adds 
strength  to  this  consideration,  that  the  class  which  may  possess  prop- 
erty, and  be  able  to  hold  office  under  this  test,  are  by  no  means,  in 
consequence  of  it,  necessarily  possessed  of  greater  virtue,  or  informa- 
tion, or  patriotism.  Gold  is  not  genius,  nor  is  land  religion ;  nor  are 
the  affluent  here  more  likely  to  possess  those  talents  and  morals 
requisite  to  fill  offices  well,  than  persons  in  middle  or  humble  life, 
among  our  village  schools  and  village  churches,  and  the  industrious 
village  workshops,  and  the  surrounding  village  farms. 

If  the  public  spirit,  the  public  patriotism,  and  the  public  talents, 
which  become  most  useful  in  public  life,  are  wanting  in  either  class,  it 
is  as  likely  to  be  in  the  wealthy  as  in  those  of  moderate  property.  The 
former  are  exposed  to  have  some  vices  which  the  latter  arc  not.  Wealth, 
also,  is  far  from  being  always  the  result  of  much  knowledge,  but  it  is 
often  the  result  of  a  lucky  accident,  or  of  inheritance ;  and  the  pos- 
sessor of  it  is  quite  likely  to  think  more  of  wealth  than  of  literature  or 
science,  to  think  more  of  rank  than  individual  merit,  and  quite  as 
much  of  his  own  interests  as  of  those  of  the  community  at  large.  And 
however  much  of  wealth  one  may  carry  with  him  into  public  life,  it 
cannot  add  an  inch  to  his  stature,  nor  put  a  new  idea  into  his  head, 
nor  suggest  one  guaranty  to  the  rights  of  the  people,  unless  it  be 
rights  connected  merely  with  property.  But  it  is  also  objected  that 
those  not  wealthy  have  not  enough  at  stake  to  rule  well.  Let  it  be 
remembered,  however,  in  all  this,  that  the  man  of  humble  life  has 
at  stake  in  government,  and  comes  into  it  to  protect,  quite  as  import- 
ant possessions  as  the  wealthy.  They  are  character,  liberty,  life. 
They  are  all  these,  in  wife,  children,  and  friends.  They  are  property, 
too,  in  small  quantities,  but  not  the  less  dear  for  being  small.  And 
if  he  has  not  a  freehold  to  be  taxed  and  to  defend,  he  has  the  proceeds 
of  his  daily  toil,  whether  on  the  farm  or  in  the  workshop ;  he  has  a 
head  to  think  and  will,  a  body  able  and  ready  to  protect  the  property 
and  lives  of  others  at  the  midnight  conflagration  and  at  the  militia 
alarm ;  and  is  the  bulwark  of  the  State  when  war  assails  and  jeopard- 
izes the  whole  foundations  of  society,  —  the  whole  wealth  of  the  rich, 
—  indeed,  the  whole  possessions  of  the  people,  and  the  whole  laws  and 
institutions  of  the  government  itself. 

If  all  this  does  not  entitle  him  to  be  eligible  to  office, —  if  it  does  not 
give  him  sufficient  stake  in  organized  government,  and  make  it  suitable 
to  let  others  vote  for  him  when  considered  the  most  worthy, — then  well 
might  we  say,  with  Dr.  Franklin,  that  when  the  property  test  thus 
alone  renders  him  qualified  or  eligible,  and  that  property  be  a  jackass, 
it  would  be  the  jackass,  rather  than  the  owner,  that  had  the  power  and 
influence  in  the  government. 

It  should  not  be  forgotten,  in  the  consideration  of  this  test,  that,  in 
expunging  it,  property  will  still  be  protected,  and  will  still  exert  all  its 
legitimate  influences. 


492  PROPERTY   TEST. 

Whilst  I  am  against  its  going  further,  I  am  as  willing  as  any  person 
that  it  should  possess  every  privilege  which  belongs  to  its  appropriate 
sphere,  and  be  faithfully  protected  while  it  helps  to  maintain  govern- 
ment, and  shuns  corruption.  I  do  not,  like  Proudhomme,  regard 
property  as  robbery,  or,  like  Fourier,  think  it  should  be  held  only  in 
common.  Let  it,  then,  continue  to  exercise  the  influence  which  is  its 
natural  accompaniment.  There  let  it  neither  proscribe  nor  be  pro- 
scribed ;  but  beyond  that,  it  is  its  own  true  policy  and  good  not  to 
intrude  or  dictate.  Nor  will  it  follow,  if  expunging  this  test,  that  men 
in  office  will  not  often  possess  as  much  property  as  this  test  exacts ; 
but  in  such  case  it  will  be  the  man,  and  not  the  property,  that  is 
elected,  and  receives,  and  is  entitled  to,  public  confidence. 

Finally,  in  our  bill  of  rights,  we  declare  that  all  men  are  equal  in 
rights.  Hence,  we  cannot  confer  privileges  on  one  class,  possessing 
freeholds  or  large  personal  estate,  and  withhold  them  from  others, 
without  an  open  violation  of  the  cardinal  principle  of  equality.  A 
different  course  might  answer  in  a  country  where,  in  the  language  of 
Jefferson,  some  are  born  booted  and  spurred,  to  ride  the  rest ;  but  not 
where,  among  the  Alps  of  New  England,  all  are  born  equally  free,  and 
equality  of  rights  is  considered  the  great  foundation-stone  of  State  and 
national  liberty.  By  retaining  such  a  test,  we  tie  up  our  own  hands, 
to  place  in  office  at  times  not  the  best  men.  The  most  popular,  the 
most  worthy  and  useful  citizen,  in  the  opinion  of  all,  may  still,  when 
an  election  arrives,  happen  to  possess  no  freehold,  and  cannot,  there- 
fore, be  voted  for.  The  test  then  operates  against  the  voter  himself, 
as  well  as  the  candidate.  If,  on  the  contrary,  as  has  too  often  been 
the  case,  the  law  as  to  the  test  is  defeated  by  fraud,  —  the  rich  using 
their  property  to  confer  the  qualification  temporarily  on  others  not 
otherwise  entitled, —  the  provision  is  a  snare,  and  aids  only  the  rich  and 
the  friends  of  the  rich,  and  imparts  to  wealth  an  artificial  and  corrupt- 
ing influence  over  all  our  elections.  In  early  life,  in  a  neighboring 
State,  where  property  qualifications  were  required  in  voters,  I  have  for 
hours  witnessed  sham  deeds  made  to  qualify  them  so  as  to  change 
small  majorities.  Such  subterfuges  show  the  evil  tendency  of  such 
tests,  and  strip  them  of  all  usefulness  in  exacting  in  either  the  voter  or 
the  candidate  the  habits  and  responsibilities  of  the  real  owner  of  much 
property.  Without  fatiguing  the  convention  with  more  on  this  occa- 
sion, I  would  only  add,  that  considerations  like  these  have  led  to  the 
abolition  of  such  tests  in  many  other  of  our  sister  States,  and  in  the 
constitution  of  the  United  States,  and,  in  my  view,  require  us  to 
imitate  their  wise  example. 


OCCASIONAL  LETTERS  AND  SPEECHES 


ON 


IMPORTANT    SUBJECTS. 


42 


OCCASIONAL  LETTERS  AND  SPEECHES  ON 
IMPORTANT  SUBJECTS, 


RIGHTS   OF   CATHOLICS.* 


Portsmouth,  N.  H.,  June  30th,  1849. 

Gentlemen: — I  have  received  a  letter  from  you,  making  inquiries  on 
the  subject  of  "  the  rights  of  Catholics  to  establish  schools  and  colleges 
for  the  purpose  of  teaching  such  useful  languages  and  sciences  as  they 
may  deem  proper,  together  with  the  exclusive  religious  doctrines  of  the 
Catholic  church."  As  you  deem  my  views  on  this  of  sufficient  import- 
ance to  request  them,  I  do  not  feel  at  liberty  to  withhold  a  reply,  con- 
sidering that  there  is  nothing  in  the  nature  of  the  questions  which 
renders  it  improper  for  me  to  comply,  by  their  connection  with  the 
party  politics  of  the  day,  or  their  liability  to  come  before  the  judiciary 
for  decision.  This  reply  will  be  not  in  the  spirit  of  an  assault  on 
others,  who  may  differ  from  me  in  opinion,  and  especially  the  majority 
of  the  last  Legislature  of  Massachusetts,  in  refusing  to  incorporate  the 
College  of  the  Holy  Cross,  at  Worcester,  and  thus  leading  you  to  make 
the  present  inquiries.  But  it  will  be  rather  to  oblige  friends,  by 
answering  inquiries  of  so  much  interest ;  and,  in  doing  it,  to  exercise 
and  express  courteously,  yet  I  hope  fearlessly,  the  same  freedom  of 
opinion  on  this  subject,  as  a  citizen,  which  they  have  done  as  legis- 
lators. 

I  consider  this  as  a  question  going  in  some  views  much  beyond  that 
of  mere  "  liberty  of  conscience^  as  usually  understood,  and  to  which 
you  allude.  Such  liberty  is  guaranteed  to  all  in  Massachusetts,  by 
the  second  article  of  her  constitution ;  and  in  most,  if  not  all  of  New 
England,  as  well  as  in  other  portions  of  the  Union.     Indeed,  liberty 

*  A  letter  to  George  F.  Emery  and  others,  of  Boston,  in  respect  to  the  incorporation 
of  a  Catholic  college  in  Worcester. 


496  RIGHTS   OF   CATHOLICS. 

of  conscience,  if  restricted  so  as  to  embrace  only  freedom  in  public 
worship,  is  now  permitted  in  Great  Britain,  as  well  as  France,  and 
several  other  portions  of  Europe. 

Even  in  New  Hampshire,  which  has  been  much  censured  on  account 
of  some  provisions  in  her  constitution  bearing  unfavorably  against  all 
not  of  the  "Protestant  religion,"  there  is  secured,  most  cautiously, 
liberty  of  conscience  to  Catholics,  no  less  than  to  Protestants. 

Thus,  in  the  second  section  of  the  bill  of  rights,  it  is  declared  that 
"  every  individual  has  a  natural  and  unalienable  right  to  worship  God 
according  to  the  dictates  of  his  own  conscience  and  reason,"  —  "  and 
no  subject  shall  be  hurt,  molested  or  restrained,  in  his  person,  liberty, 
or  estate,  for  worshipping  God  in  the  manner  and  season  most  agree- 
able to  the  dictates  of  his  own  conscience,  or  for  his  religious  profes- 
sion, sentiments,  or  persuasion,  provided  he  doth  not  disturb  the  pub- 
lic peace,  or  others  in  their  religious  worship." 

But  this  sacred  right,  thus  emphatically  guaranteed  to  all  in  New 
Hampshire,  no  less  than  elsewhere,  is  only  one  of  the  rights  connected 
with  religion  and  the  progress  of  civilization,  which  is  claimed  by  Cath- 
olics, in  common  with  other  sects,  not  only  in  New  England,  but,  per- 
haps, in  all  places  where  exists  entire  freedom  in  the  worship  of  God. 
The  other  rights  usually  asked,  and  asked  on  the  occasion  before 
referred  to,  are  to  establish  schools  and  colleges  to  teach  languages 
and  science,  as  well  as  their  own  peculiar  tenets  of  religion. 

If  these  are  involved  or  implied  in  liberty  of  conscience,  then  the 
right  to  that  includes  the  right  to  these ;  and,  in  securing  that  by  the 
constitution,  as  already  shown,  these  also  are  secured.  But  one  of 
these  questions  or  claims  may  not  be  identical  with  the  other,  nor  an 
inseparable  incident.  Because,  to  worship  Deity  freely  is  a  devo- 
tional act  of  homage  to  him  by  each  individual ;  but  to  instruct  others 
in  letters  or  religion  is  an  act  of  benevolence  towards  erring  men,  and 
differs  in  form,  if  not  substance,  from  the  other.  But  all  of  these  are 
interwoven  and  invaluable.  Without  the  power  to  teach  the  religious 
doctrines  which  Catholics  profess  to  believe  to  be  vital  to  salvation, 
liberty  of  conscience  would  be  stripped  of  many  of  its  attractions  and 
benefits.  So  the  teaching  of  letters  and  science  where  one's  own 
family  and  denomination  can  resort,  is  highly  conducive,  if  not  indis- 
pensable, to  preserve  equal  intelligence  and  power  with  others  in  civil 
life,  and  that  for  which  liberty  of  conscience  itself  is  chiefly  designed, 
viz.,  the  enlightened  and  unfettered  exercise  of  one's  own  peculiar 
faith. 

More  detailed  reasons  why  these  rights  should  extend  to  the  teach- 
ing of  literature,  as  well  as  religion,  are,  that  intelligence,  or  a  good 
education,  especially  in  those  destined,  by  a  collegiate  life,  to  become 
preachers,  is  highly  useful  in  liberating  the  human  mind  and  heart 
from  error.  Otherwise,  it  might  be  the  blind  leading  the  blind.  To 
those  not  so  destined,  it  is  sowing  the  seeds  of  all  which  is  conducive 
to  the  able  discharge  of  duty  in  the  professions,  in  commercial  stations, 


EIGHTS   OF   CATHOLICS.  497 

in  the  arts ;  and,  indeed,  by  throwing  new  lights  on  the  whole  path  of 
social  life,  aids  the  correct  performance  of  duty  in  every  station,  from 
the  humblest  to  the  loftiest.  The  College  of  the  Holy  Cross  educates 
young  men,  by  preparatory  studies,  either  for  commercial  life,  the 
learned  professions,  or  the  priesthood,  as  may  be  desired ;  and  is  not, 
as  are  the  impressions  of  many,  confined  exclusively  to  the  last.  It 
would  be  a  marvel,  if  the  region  of  free  schools,  of  the  founders  of  the 
earliest  colleges  and  the  printers  of  the  first  books  in  America,  should 
now  become  unwilling  to  concede,  as  a  right,  the  power  of  any  citizens 
to  extend  the  blessings  of  education ;  or  should  not  go  further,  and 
encourage  or  aid  all  in  the  duty  to  manage  in  the  most  convenient 
and  effective  manner,  whether  through  incorporations  or  otherwise,  the 
funds  raised  voluntarily  by  themselves,  or  liberally  bestowed  by 
others,  for  such  laudable  objects,  and  to  extend  with  them,  thoroughly 
as  possible,  the  rich  fruits  of  literature,  science  and  Christianity. 

So  far  from  discouraging  this  course,  it  is  imposed  as  a  constitu- 
tional duty,  in  both  Massachusetts  and  New  Hampshire,  that  their 
Legislatures  should  aid  to  diffuse  both  learning  and  science,  as  well  as 
religion  and  morality  ;  and  cherish  "the  seminaries"  of  the  former. 
Thus,  in  section  second,  chapter  fifth,  of  the  constitution  of  Massachu- 
setts, it  is  declared  that  "it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Legislatures  and 
magistrates,  in  all  future  periods  of  this  commonwealth,  to  cherish  the 
interests  of  literature  and  the  sciences,  and  all  seminaries  of  them." 
In  part  first,  article  third,  is  the  provision  in  favor  of  "  piety,  religion 
and  morality."  In  the  constitution  of  New  Hampshire,  part  first, 
sections  six  and  eighty-third,  are  similar  declarations  in  favor  both  of 
religion  and  literature,  as  well  as  the  sciences. 

In  further  support  of  these  views,  it  may  be  added,  that  it  is  one 
great  topic  of  congratulation  to  the  liberal  and  patriotic,  as  to  the  teach- 
ing and  support  of  religion,  that  in  Massachusetts,  no  less  than  in  most 
of  this  country,  no  union  of  church  and  State  is  tolerated  by  her  peo- 
ple in  her  constitution.  They  speak  there  for  the  present  and  all 
coming  ages,  till  altered  by  them,  and  declare,  virtually,  that  no  par- 
ticular sect  shall  be  allowed  to  have  public  assistance  forbidden  to 
others,  —  none  alone  allowed  to  have  liberty  to  diffuse  its  doctrines  in 
modes  not  open  to  others,  —  none  alone  declared  entitled  to  incorpo- 
rations or  donations  which  are  to  be  withheld  from  others.  "Each 
denomination  of  Christians,"  as  will  hereafter  be  explained  more  fully, 
it  is  guaranteed,  "  shall  be  equally  under  the  protection  of  the 
law." 

To  be  sure,  in  part  first,  article  second,  of  the  constitution  of  Mas- 
sachusetts, towns  and  parishes  are  permitted  to  make  provision  "for 
the  support  and  maintenance  of  public  Protestant  teachers." 

But  it  will  be  seen  that  there  is  in  this  nothing  prohibitory  on  any 
sect  of  Christians,  as  a  religious  society,  and  much  more  as  a  corpora- 
tion, from  supporting  their  own  teachers,  or  from  any  society  being 
incorporated  for  this  purpose.  And  it  is  still  further  removed  from 
42* 


498  RIGHTS   OF   CATHOLICS. 

any  restriction  on  any  religious  denomination,  being  allowed  an  act  of 
incorporation  to  manage  its  property,  while  educating  young  men,  like 
the  College  of  the  Holy  Cross,  preparatory  to  a  commercial  life  and 
the  professions,  as  well  as  for  teachers  of  religion.  The  only  restric- 
tion in  the  constitution  of  either  of  the  States  referred  to,  on  any 
denomination,  to  form  and  spread  its  opinions  in  the  manner  deemed 
by  itself  most  proper,  is  a  restriction  imposed  on  all  denominations,  — 
':  not  to  disturb  the  public  peace,  or  others  in  their  religious  ivor- 
ship" 

It  would  be  a  wonder  if  such  were  not  the  rights  and  the  practice 
in  this  country,  so  proud  of  its  toleration  and  equal  rights,  when  in 
England,  once  armed  with  her  bloody  codes  against  Puritans,  no  less 
than  at  other  times  against  "Papists,"  the  latter,  as  well  as  the  former, 
are  now  allowed  to  hold  office  in  the  army,  navy  and  Parliament,  and 
permitted  to  enjoy,  not  only  full  liberty  of  conscience,  but  the  right  to 
teach  literature,  science,  and  their  peculiar  religion,  in  colleges,  and 
receive  some  proportionate  grants  of  money,  even  from  the  public 
treasury,  to  assist  them  in  it,  as,  a  few  years  since,  if  not  before,  at 
Maynooth.  It  is  mere  Protestant  ascetidency,  not  exclusiveness, 
which  is  now  sought  there,  though  under  an  alliance  of  church  and 
State. 

The  only  objection  as  to  the  mode  of  teaching  in  the  College  of  the 
Holy  Cross,  as  different  from  like  institutions  among  Protestants,  is 
not  that  it  is  exclusive  in  what  it  teaches  as  true  Christianity  ;  for  so 
are  they  generally.  But  it  is  that  a  more  exclusive  compliance  is 
required  to  its  forms  and  discipline,  or  a  stricter  attendance  on  its 
religious  instruction.  If  this  be  so,  yet  no  more  exclusive  adoption 
of  its  code  of  faith  is  demanded,  unless  believed  in ;  nor  does  its  course 
of  discipline  on  the  subject  prevent  many  Protestants  from  sending 
their  children  to  Catholic  institutions,  where  two  of  my  own  have  been 
educated.  And  if  fewer  of  other  denominations  attend  this  than  other 
sectarian  colleges,  less  ground  exists  for  the  charge  and  the  fear 
expressed  of  their  thus  proselyting  others. 

While  the  Catholics,  also,  shall  neither  ask  nor  receive  money  from 
the  public  treasury,  or  from  compulsory  taxation,  no  ground  exists 
for  another  objection,  that  the  school  fund,  or  other  resources  of  the 
State,  will  thus  be  diverted  so  as  not  to  be  used  for  the  benefit  of  all 
who  may  dislike  conformity  to  any  particular  mode  of  religious  wor- 
ship. 

If,  after  all  this,  the  college  at  Worcester  be  not  entitled  to  the 
rank  and  to  the  State  endowments  of  a  public  institution,  with  the 
power  of  conferring  degrees,  this  furnishes  no  reason  why  it  should 
not  receive  an  act  of  incorporation  to  manage  its  own  property,  and  to 
aid  in  its  course  of  useful  instruction,  as  fully  as  any  private  associa- 
tion may  for  its  purposes.  Can  it  be  less  entitled  to  such  a  facility  than 
every  religious  parish  in  the  State  ?  than  a  few  bank  projectors,  or 
manufacturers,  or  friends  to  a  branch  railroad?    Have  they  not  a 


EIGHTS   OF   CATHOLICS.  499 

right  to  equal  privileges  and  favors,  in  respect  to  their  property? 
Ought  they  not  to  be  allowed  the  same,  or  as  great,  legislative  means 
and  security  for  their  business,  as  a  few  inhabitants  in  some  parish,  or 
a  few  capitalists  in  some  country  village  or  city  ward,  when  the  for- 
mer are,  for  some  purposes,  the  organ  of  one-seventh  of  the  whole  pop- 
ulation of  the  State,  and  are  devoted  to  such  laudable  objects  as  instruc- 
tion in  letters,  science,  and  religion? 

But,  independent  of  the  private  rights  of  all  useful  associations 
being  equal  to  receive  acts  of  incorporation,  consider  a  moment,  if  it 
be  not  a  public  benefit  to  the  State,  and  indeed  the  whole  country,  to 
have  its  Catholic  population,  as  well  as  those  of  other  sects,  better 
instructed  in  letters  and  science  ?  to  have  their  young  men  better  pre- 
pared, by  a  due  "course  of  studies,"  for  "commercial"  as  well  as 
professional  life  ?  especially  as  they  accomplish  the  laudable  object  at 
their  own  expense,  and  with  general  funds  derived  from  the  liberal 
donations  of  their  own  friends.  And  is  it  not  useful  to  the  public  — 
the  whole  country  —  to  have  them  open  their  doors  for  all  young  men 
of  all  denominations  for  a  like  course  of  study  and  preparation,  if  they 
are  willing  to  receive  such  instruction  as  is  given  to  all,  and  conform  to 
the  discipline  of  the  establishment?  Besides  these  facts  and  reasons, 
it  must  be  recollected  that  legislators  in  this  country  should  be  con- 
trolled by  the  provisions  in  the  constitutions  of  their  States ;  and, 
whatever  they  might  have  the  naked  power  to  do  on  this  subject,  when 
not  restrained  nor  regulated  by  constitutions,  they  have  by  these  con- 
stitutions no  authority  to  give  a  preference  by  incorporations  to  one 
denomination  over  another, —  no  power  to  establish  a  union  of  church 
and  State  with  any  one  of  them ;  and  that  the  whole  code  of  toleration 
and  free  principles  on  which  our  American  institutions  rest  is  opposed 
to  any  such  discriminations.  Most  of  our  constitutions  expressly 
guarantee  each  sect  against  any  preference  of  others,  in  any  way  what- 
ever. Hence  this  liberty  to  teach  religion  or  literature  on  equal  terms 
becomes  a  constitutional  right  in  the  members  of  each  denomination, 
and  one  which  Legislatures  are  not  justified  to  disregard  or  refuse,  any 
more  than  any  other  constitutional  right.  Thus,  in  the  third  article, 
and  again  in  one  of  the  amendments,  to  the  constitution  of  Massachu- 
setts, it  is  explicitly  provided  that  "  every  denomination  of  Christians, 
demeaning  themselves  peaceably  and  as  good  subjects  of  the  common- 
wealth, shall  be  equally  under  the  protection  of  the  law ;  and  no  subor- 
dination of  any  one  sect  or  denomination  to  another  shall  ever  be 
established  by  law."  So,  in  New  Hampshire,  as  she  is  among  the 
New  England  States  to  whom  you  refer,  is  a  like  provision,  almost 
verbatim  et  literatim,  in  the  sixth  article  of  her  bill  of  rights,  though 
she  is  often  taunted  as  the  most  intolerant  towards  Catholics.  These 
clauses  furnish  a  new  clear  and  constitutional  guaranty  against 
allowing  any  privileges  to  other  sects  which  are  not  allowed  to  Cath- 
olics. It  therefore  follows,  that  if  Unitarians,  or  Calvinists,  or  Meth- 
odists, are  permitted  to  have  acts  of  incorporation  to  hold  and  manage 


500  RIGHTS   OF   CATHOLICS. 

such  portions  of  their  property  as  is  destined  to  assist  in  teaching  let- 
ters, science,  and  religion,  so  as  to  use  it  with  more  convenience  and 
efficiency,  and  confer  honorable  diplomas  and  degrees,  it  is  manifest 
that  Catholics  should  be  permitted  the  same,  in  order  to  be  "equally 
under  the  protection  of  the  law"  and  to  prevent  any  "subordina- 
tion of  any  one  sect  or  denomination  to  another"  So,  if  the  for- 
mer persuasions  may  teach  the  tenets  of  their  own  faith  only,  under 
such  acts  of  incorporation,  as  is  constantly  done,  may  not  the  latter  1 
and  must  they  not  be  allowed  to  do  it,  or  the  equality  violated  which 
the  constitutions  of  both  of  these  States  secure  ?  If  they  are  all  Chris- 
tians,—  if  they  all  believe  in  one  revelation,  and  trust  in  the  atone- 
ment of  one  Saviour, —  is  not  the  constitution  of  both  States  designed 
to  be  their  common  aegis  against  partiality  and  unequal  discriminations  1 
And  is  not  the  predominance  of  one  or  the  other  sects  to  be  left  to  the 
people,  as  worshippers  and  believers,  rather  than  to  Legislatures,  by 
unfortunately  showering  privileges  and  favors  on  one  which  it  with- 
holds from  another  ? 

When  equal  protection  to  all  is  objected  to  by  some,  the  reason 
assigned  is,  that  the  teaching  in  the  College  of  the  Holy  Cross  is 
exclusively  of  its  own  religious  tenets,  and  hence  is  not  to  be  encour- 
aged by  an  act  of  incorporation ;  — forgetting  that,  in  most  colleges,  as 
at  Cambridge  and  Amherst,  no  less  than  Andover,  or  Newton,  or 
Wilbraham,  it  is  also  in  practice  similar ;  forgetting,  too,  that  it  is 
expected  to  be  similar,  as  associations  of  no  denomination  can  be  sup- 
posed willing,  unless  hypocrites,  to  teach  what  they  do  not  believe ; 
and,  though  persons  of  another  faith  may  be  allowed  to  attend  those 
institutions,  it  is  well  known  that  those  of  another  feith  will  not  be 
allowed  to  instruct  in  them;  and  that  conversions  to  the  Catholic 
religion,  one  of  the  objections  to  an  incorporation  here,  are  likely  to  be 
less  frequent  from  other  sects,  the  more  exclusive  they  are  in  Worces- 
ter in  confining  their  instructions  to  their  own  denomination. 

But  how  unphilosophical  is  the  fear  that  truth  is  not  likely  to  pre- 
vail where  reason  is  left  free  in  society  "to  combat  error;"  that, 
"crushed  to  earth,"  she  is  not  able  to  rise  again;  and  Christianity 
itself,  the  revelation  from  God,  the  hopes,  promises,  and  glories  of  his 
only  Son,  cannot  triumph,  unless  aided  by  feeble  man  with  disabilities 
and  disfranchisements  of  Catholics  !  As  if  our  holy,  heaven-descended 
religion  could  not  stand  firm,  or  advance  over  the  earth,  with  the  strong 
tide  of  public  opinion  in  its  favor,  and  all  its  Divine  supports,  and  no 
persecuting,  powerful  paganism  to  thwart  or  intimidate,  when  it  has 
spread  and  triumphed  in  defiance  of  the  latter,  and  of  every  machination 
of  infidelity ;  and  as  if  our  Saviour,  or  his  disciples,  ever  condescended 
to  ask  any  discriminations,  any  peculiar  protection  or  monopolizing 
assistance,  from  the  civil  laws,  whether  Jewish  or  Gentile  ! 

But  the  Catholic  religion  is  believed  by  some  to  abound  in  error, 
and  therefore  it  is  argued  that  a  right  exists  to  treat  it  with  partiality, 
and  inflict  on  it  disabilities.     Would  not  this  be  persecuting  its  mem- 


RIGHTS   OF   CATHOLICS.  501 

bers  for  opinion's  sake  ?  Besides  this,  it  is  a  matter  of  constitutional 
right,  and  not  of  mere  discretion,  that  all  Christian  sects  be  here  treated 
with  equal  favor ;  and  Catholics  are,  it  is  believed,  not  denied  to  have 
some  small  claims  to  be  a  Christian  sect.  Were  it  merely  a  matter  of 
loose  discretion,  or  expediency,  then  some  of  the  collateral  inquiries  might 
be  pertinent  and  proper  which  have  been  indulged  in  as  to  the  com- 
parative excellences  of  that  and  other  sects,  and  the  usefulness  or 
expediency  of  encouraging  their  colleges  by  acts  of  incorporation.  As 
it  is,  however,  a  constitutional  right,  I  would  only  add,  in  connection 
with  some  of  the  comparisons  made  against  their  prayer,  that  when 
the  Catholics  in  Massachusetts  exceed  one-seventh  of  the  whole  popu- 
lation, it  can  hardly  be  pretended  that  their  importance  in  numbers  is 
not  enough  to  entitle  them  to  the  conveniences  and  legal  protection  for 
their .  property  and  rights  which  are  open  and  granted  to  other  sects. 
When  they  already  have  a  college  established,  funds  collected,  and  a 
respectable  attendance  of  students,  it  cannot  be  pretended  that  as  much 
occasion  does  not  exist  as  is  usual  with  other  sects  for  requesting  an 
incorporation  ;  and,  more  especially,  as  without  it  they  have  been  com- 
pelled, thus  far,  with  much  inconvenience,  to  have  their  property  held  and 
managed  in  trust  by  another  incorporated  college,  five  hundred  miles 
distant.  When  abuses  are  guarded  against  by  proposing  in  this  incor- 
poration to  empower  the  Legislature  to  visit  and  examine  all  the  con- 
cerns of  the  college,  and  when  it  must  be  unjust  to  future  Legislatures 
t;o  apprehend  that  all  errors  will  not  be  speedily  corrected,  it  does  not 
answer  to  urge  the  danger  of  abuse  against  it.  Nor  can  it  be  pre- 
tended that  the  course  of  instruction  will  be  illiberal,  narrow-minded, 
or  behind  the  wants  of  the  age,  when  this  college  educates  all  by  a 
preparation  and  course  of  study  fitted  for  commercial  and  professional 
life,  if  desired,  no  less  than  for  ecclesiastical  stations. 

In  short,  are  we  to  be  asked  to  stop  before  an  incorporation,  and 
argue  the  equal  rights  of  Catholics  to  it  as  a  sect,  on  more  general 
grounds  of  their  position  in  the  world,  past  or  present,  when  the  denom- 
ination is  claimed  by  its  members  to  have  been  for  several  centuries 
the  great  depository  and  sole  expounder  of  Christianity  ?  When  some 
of  its  clergy,  during  that  period,  have  been  eulogized  by  Protestants 
as  the  most  devoted  missionaries  and  martyrs  of  the  cross,  in  every 
quarter  of  the  globe  ?  When  the  revival  of  letters  and  the  diffusion 
of  civilization  over  Europe  are  admitted  by  all  to  have  been  under 
their  auspices  ?  When  their  tenets  now  not  only  predominate  in  sev- 
eral of  the  most  powerful  and  enlightened  kingdoms  there,  but  Amer- 
ica itself  was  discovered  by  Catholics,  and  large  portions  of  it  are  now 
peopled  by  those  of  that  faith,  and  its  doctrine  preached  by  them  to 
improve  the  semi-barbarians  both  in  Africa  and  Asia?  Under  these 
circumstances,  let  me  again  inquire  if  it  is  necessary  to  meet  and  argue 
its  tendencies,  its  equal  right  to  toleration  and  legal  protection,  or 
the  soundness  of  its  doctrines  compared  with  other  persuasions  ?  as, 
for  instance,  whether  it  differs  more  or  less  from  the  standard  of  those 


502  EIGHTS   OF   CATHOLICS. 

who  landed  at  Plymouth  Rock,  than  Unitarians  do,  or  Episcopalians  1 
If  our  fathers,  after  having  felt  the  lash  of  persecution  from  the  latter, 
as  well  as  from  Catholics,  felt  willing  to  forget  and  forgive,  and  bound 
themselves  sacredly  to  secure  liberty  of  conscience  and  equal  rights  to 
all,  are  we  so  much  wiser,  or  more  honest,  as  to  be  justified  in  break- 
ing their  solemn  engagements  ?  If,  as  their  opponents  charge,  Cath- 
olics, at  some  places  and  times,  have  slid  into  abuses  and  persecution, 
let  me  ask  what  sect  has  long  been  without  abuses,  and  is  privileged 
to  throw  the  first  stone  ?  How  few  have  been  without  some  Servetus 
burnt  at  the  stake,  some  Roger  Williams  driven  into  exile,  or  some 
Bunyan  or  Baxter  imprisoned  in  dungeons !  Or,  if  this  be  because 
some  other  sects  have  produced  heroes  and  martyrs  and  jurists,  schol- 
ars and  statesmen,  are  we  to  forget  how  Catholic  Littleton  and  Bulwer 
wrote  on  law,  or  Sir  Thomas  More  administered  it  ?  or  how  some  of 
the  Catholic  Edwards  and  Henrys  fought?  or  how  Catholic  Eenelons 
have  preached  ?  or  how  all  our  ancestors,  and,  indeed,  all  the  piety, 
genius,  and  chivalry  of  Europe,  once  bent  before  the  Catholic  banner 
of  the  cross?  Or,  in  truth,  how  the  early  Catholics  of  Maryland 
conducted  themselves  in  toleration,  compared  with  the  early  Puritans 
of  a  part  of  New  England  ? 

We  are  not  the  apologists  of  the  errors  or  abuses  of  any  denomi- 
nation. We  merely  mean  to  say  that  none  should  criminate  or  dis- 
franchise for  what  all  practise  under  the  temptation  of  power,  when 
long  possessed,  and  little  restrained  by  law  and  public  opinion.  Differ 
we  may,  in  some  respects ;  differ  we  do,  and  differ  we  must,  while 
independent  and  free.  But  I  exercise  only  ordinary  candor,  in  being 
willing  to  admit,  for  Catholics  as  well  as  Protestants,  that  some  of  their 
supposed  defects  have  belonged  to  the  ages  when  they  flourished  most. 
Some,  too,  belonged  to  the  race,  or  country,  or  form  of  government, 
with  which  they  existed.  All  sects  seem  to  have  acted  often  as  was 
suited  or  well  adapted  to  those  circumstances ;  and  hence  their  errors, 
when  occurring,  were  not  so  mischievous  in  their  consequences  as  they 
otherwise  might  have  been,  and,  ere  long,  were  usually  followed  by 
improvements  and  reforms,  which  grew,  in  some  degree,  out  of 
improvements  in  arts  and  sciences,  in  manners  and  governments,  and 
the  freer  workings  of  that  Divine  genius  in  Christianity,  which  must 
pervade,  more  or  less,  all  sects  under  its  dominion,  and  produce,  in 
due  time,  examples  of  humanity  and  reforms  in  society,  which  are 
gradually  changing  the  world  for  the  better  in  every  age,  and  advanc- 
ing civilization  wherever  the  Bible  spreads,  and  breathes  a  purer  life 
into  the  dead  bones  of  heathenism. 

This  is  hardly  a  time,  too,  for  odious  comparisons  between  Cath- 
olics and  other  religious  sects  in  this  model  republic  of  ours,  when 
Catholic  countries  now  lead  the  van  in  reforms  of  government  in 
Europe.  Nor  is  it  the  time  to  revive  discriminations  and  buried  ani- 
mosities, prejudices  and  by-gone  feuds;  to  restore,  for  example,  the 
annual  festival  here  of  burning  the  Pope  in  effigy,  or  "popish  coffee- 


RIGHTS   OF   CATHOLICS.  503 

houses,  where,"  according  to  Macaulay,  in  England,  "good  Protest- 
ants believed  Jesuits  planned  over  their  cups  another  great  fire,  and 
cast  silver  bullets  to  shoot  the  king;"  when  we  are  just  fresh  from 
public  meetings,  called  by  all  parties,  to  eulogize  the  Pope  as  having 
taken  the  lead  in  political  improvements  in  Europe,  and  when  the  seat 
of  his  power,  both  temporal  and  spiritual,  has  become  the  seat  of  liberal 
principles,  and  this  country,  without  regard  to  sect  or  party,  is  prepar- 
ing to  give  triumphal  processions,  and  shower  princely  hospitalities,  on 
the  Catholic  Father  Mathew,  for  his  labors  in  one  of  the  greatest 
reforms  of  the  age.  But  it  seems  rather  to  be  an  era  to  vindicate 
among  us  the  equal  rights  of  all  belonging  to  the  great  brotherhood  of 
Christianity,  to  exert  our  sympathies  for  all,  and  encourage  concord 
and  peace  with  all,  since  one  revelation  and  hope  are  the  guides  and 
support  of  all.  It  seems  rather  a  fit  occasion  to  show  how  all,  though 
differing  in  details,  may  yet  harmonize,  and  enjoy  like  privileges  in 
peace,  through  the  love  and  fraternal  spirit  of  the  Gospel  of  peace, 
which  they  all  profess  to  inculcate.  We  can  thus  demonstrate  that 
the  very  abundance  of  sects  is  a  great  security  against  overgrown 
power  and  oppression  by  any  one  of  them ;  and  can,  as  we  should,  and 
can  in  this  way  only,  uphold  with  success  and  impartiality  the  great 
principle  of  equal  toleration  guaranteed  by  our  fathers  to  all  Christian 
denominations.  This  great  principle  of  equal  toleration  involves,  as 
we  have  before  seen,  equal  protection  by  law  to  all,  and  constitutes  one 
of  the  chief  corner-stones  of  our  free  institutions.  Well  might  our 
fathers  so  establish  it,  not  only  from  their  own  sorrowful  experience  in 
a  different  course,  both  in  suffering  and  inflicting  persecution,  but  from 
the  beauty  and  justice  of  the  doctrine  itself  of  equal  toleration  and 
equal  protection,  and  from  the  reciprocal  advantages  derived  from  it  in 
our  Revolution,  and  which  then  foreshadowed  so  strikingly  in  battle  and 
public  council  what  has  since  been  repeated  in  every  station  in  society. 
Catholic  Carroll  then  signing  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  and 
defending  our  liberties  in  Congress ;  Catholic  Lafayette  bleeding  for 
us  at  Brandywine,  and  hundreds  of  the  same  faith  since  helping  us  to 
conquer  at  Chippewa,  and  to  plant  our  flag  on  the  battlements  of 
Mexico ;  and  myriads  of  them  to  aid  in  less  brilliant,  but  not  to  be 
forgotten  triumphs,  such  as  felling  our  forests,  building  our  railroads 
and  canals,  and  filling  every  department  of  useful  industry. 

You  inquire  my  views  as  to  certain  rights  of  Catholics  in  New  Eng- 
land generally,  and  I  have  answered  chiefly  as  to  Massachusetts  and 
New  Hampshire. 

I  have  done  this  because  none  of  the  thirteen  States  situated  in  New 
England  made  constitutions  early,  and  which  were  likely  to  be  tinged 
with  some  ancient  prejudices  against  Catholics,  except  those  two  States. 
Connecticut  and  Rhode  Island  continued  to  act  under  their  old  royal 
charters,  as  constitutions ;  and  Maine  formed  a  part  of  Massachusetts ; 
and  Vermont,  a  part  of  New  Hampshire  or  New  York. 

Whatever,  then,  may  have  been  done  by  the  last  Legislature  of  Mas- 


504  RIGHTS   OF   CATHOLICS. 

sachusetts,  in  refusing  to  incorporate  the  College  of  the  Holy  Cross,  at 
Worcester,  let  none  taunt  her  people  at  large  that  they  have  by  their 
constitution  forbidden  such  an  incorporation.  On  the  contrary,  by 
that  the  doors  are  open  for  equal  protection  to  every  religious  sect  of 
Christianity,  and  all  possess  an  equal  right  to  facilities  for  instruction 
in  letters,  science,  and  piety,  with  the  single  apparent  exception,  before 
explained,  as  to  public  ministers  in  a  parish  being  allowed  to  be  sup- 
ported by  taxes,  if  Protestants,  and  if  their  hearers  please.  Nor  is 
tiiere  a  tithe  as  much  of  hostility  as  has  been  represented,  to  those  of 
the  Catholic  faith,  in  the  constitution  of  New  Hampshire ;  and  much 
less  among  her  people,  and  none  whatever  in  her  general  laws  and 
general  history.  It  is  confessed  she  has  one  provision  beyond  that  in 
Massachusetts,  and  copied  from  hers,  on  the  subject  of  the  Protestant 
religion,  which  is  objectionable,  but  which  is  not  known  ever  in  prac- 
tice to  have  been  used  to  countenance  the  exclusion  of  Catholics  from 
the  equal  enjoyment  of  any  right,  much  less  such  as  are  now  under 
consideration.  They  are  still,  in  other  parts  of  her  bill  of  rights, 
guaranteed  in  full  liberty  of  conscience,  and  in  the  equal  protection  of 
the  laws.  They  are  not  debarred  from  the  equal  rights  of  suffrage 
with  all  other  sects ;  nor  has  their  right  to  hold  office,  from  the  high- 
est to  the  lowest,  to  or  under  the  General  Government,  as  inhabitants 
of  the  State,  ever  been  interfered  with.  And  they  may  hold  all  State 
offices,  judicial,  ministerial,  and  financial.  But,  in  an  unlucky  hour, 
in  1784,  in  her  second  constitution,  there  happened  to  be  interpolated 
a  qualification  for  her  legislative  and  chief  executive  officers  —  only  two 
classes  —  that  they  should  be  of  the  "  Protestant  religion."  The  cause 
of  this  anomaly,  and  one  so  directly  contradicted  by  other  parts  of  the 
constitution,  it  is  difficult  to  discover,  after  more  than  a  half-century, 
and  without  any  printed  journal  or  debates  of  the  constitution. 

Why  should  a  Councillor  be  required  to  be  a  Protestant,  and  not  a 
Secretary  of  State,  nor  a  Judge  of  the  Supreme  Court?  The  only 
solution  of  the  riddle  for  inserting  the  provision  at  all,  or,  if  at  all,  in 
so  restricted  a  form,  is  that  handed  down  by  tradition,  viz.,  taunts 
flung  out  by  the  enemies  of  independence  that  the  French  alliance  was 
meant  to  introduce  the  Catholic  religion,  and  those  qualifications  were 
introduced  to  disprove  such  a  design.  Less  was  probably  thought  of 
its  errors  in  sound  theory,  as  nobody  was  likely  to  suffer  from  it, — no 
Catholic  church  then  existing  in  the  State,  and  probably  not  a  dozen 
scattered  members  of  that  denomination.  But,  being  wrong  in  theory, 
though  nugatory  in  practice,  and  there  being  some  increase  of  Catho- 
lics within  the  last  twenty  years,  many  of  the  opponents  of  these  pro- 
visions have  attempted  their  correction,  and  labored,  with  myself,  by 
pen,  tongue,  and  vote,  to  get  so  illiberal  tests  expunged.  We  did  not 
help  to  introduce  them  in  1784,  being  most  of  us  then  unborn ;  nor 
help  to  retain  them  in  1792,  the  time  of  the  last  revision  of  our  con- 
stitution, being  then  most  of  us  in  our  cradles. 


RIGHTS   OF   CATHOLICS.  505 

It  must  be  remembered  that  this  constitution  provides  for  no  change 
except  once  in  seven  years,  and  then  not  by  acting  on  a  single  point,  but 
opening  the  whole  to  a  revision  by  a  convention,  and  their  changes  to 
be  sanctioned  by  two-thirds  of  the  people.  No  convention  since  1792 
has  been  authorized,  partly  because  a  majority  of  the  people  have  been 
unwilling  to  risk  the  expenses  and  anticipated  evils  of  other  amend- 
ments, which  might  be  made,  for  the  sake  of  getting  rid  of  this  restric- 
tion, so  inoperative  in  practice,  and  which,  indeed,  so  long  ago  as  1792, 
I  am  happy  to  be  able  to  show  that  the  majority  of  her  people,  as  well 
as  of  the  convention,  then  pointedly  condemned. 

Two-thirds  being  required  to  make  an  amendment,  after  several 
trials,  this  test  for  governor  was  stricken  out  in  the  convention ;  and 
the  people  sustained  that  vote  by  2319  in  its  favor,  and  only  1258 
against  it.  But  the  majority  being  but  1061,  or  little  short  of  two- 
thirds,  the  exclusion  of  the  test  did  not  prevail,  though  a  decided 
majority  of  the  votes  of  the  people,  as  well  as  of  the  convention,  was 
in  favor  of  its  exclusion.  A  personal  examination  of  the  records  shows 
this  clearly.  Grant,  then,  that  some  countenance  for  unfavorable 
discriminations  against  Catholics  has  stolen  into  the  constitutions  of 
Massachusetts  and  New  Hampshire,  and  some  in  the  latter  which  are 
not  in  the  former ;  they  do  not  affect  the  present  question,  as  to  their 
right  to  have  the  College  of  the  Holy  Cross  incorporated ;  and  where 
they  bear  against  it  all,  by  way  of  analogy,  are  overruled  and  contra- 
dicted by  the  paramount  provisions,  before  specified  in  both  States, 
forbidding  any  discrimination,  to  be  made  between  different  sects. 

The  convention  of  New  Hampshire,  it  will  be  seen  by  its  journal  in 
1792,  foresaw  and  predicted  this  conflict.  But  the  only  safe  rule  of 
construction,  in  such  cases,  is  to  let  the  causes  in  favor  of  equal  rights 
and  the  largest  liberty  prevail  over  others  of  a  more  restricted  char- 
acter. In  another  clause,  part  first,  section  sixth,  of  her  constitution, 
in  connection  with  this  topic,  the  people  of  New  Hampshire  carefully 
forbid  the  compelling  of  any  sect  "  to  pay  towards  the  support  of  the 
teacher  or  teachers  of  another  persuasion,  sect,  or  denomination." 
And  her  celebrated  toleration  act  of  1819  guarded  well  against  eva- 
sions of  this,  and  secured  well  to  all  sects  their  constitutional  exemp- 
tions. Indeed,  every  citizen  of  that  State  may  feel  a  pride  in  the 
liberality  of  her  constitution  in  most  other  respects,  and  that  she  has 
the  credit  of  forming,  in  December,  1776,  one  of  the  first  constitutions 
in  the  Union  established  after  our  independence,  though  some  of  the 
timid  and  wavering  then  protested  against  the  step,  because  the  large 
States,  such  "as  Virginia  and  New  York,"  had  not  taken  the  lead. 

It  will  thus  be  seen,  in  these  hasty  remarks  in  reply  to  your  inquir- 
ies, that  I  do  not  concur  in  the  views  of  those  who  refused  to  incor- 
porate the  College  of  the  Holy  Cross,  at  Worcester ;  and  that,  in  my 
opinion,  the  Catholics  possess  rights  to  establish  schools  and  colleges, 
to  teach  letters,  science,  and  their  own  religion ;  and  are,  by  the  con- 
43 


506  PUBLIC  SERVICES  APPRECIATED. 

stitutions  of  Massachusetts,  New  Hampshire,  and,  it  is  believed,  of 
every  New  England  State,  guaranteed  equally  to  have  all  legal  aid  to 
exercise  those*  rights  which  is  given  to  other  denominations  of  Chris- 
tians. Respectfully, 

LEVI  WOODBURY. 


PUBLIC   SERVICES  APPRECIATED. 


Boston,  10th  April,  1841. 
To  the  Honorable  Levi  Woodbury. 

Sir  :  —  On  your  return  to  your  home,  after  having  retired  from  the 
public  trust,  which  has  devolved  upon  you  as  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  under  two  administrations,  the  Democratic  County  Com- 
mittee for  Suffolk  avail  themselves  of  your  passing  through  Boston  to 
express  their  high  sense  of  the  fidelity  and  perseverance  with  which 
you  have  adhered  to  and  carried  out  that  most  important  of  all  the 
democratic  measures  now  at  issue  —  the  separation  of  the  govern- 
ment from  the  banks. 

Whatever  may  be  the  substitute  or  changes  which  the  present  tem- 
porary administration  may  propose  in  the  keeping  of  the  public 
moneys,  it  will  be  matter  of  congratulation  that  the  administration  of 
Mr.  Van  Buren,  during  your  direction  of  the  treasury  department, 
practically  demonstrated  the  entire  safety,  facility  and  sound  and 
wholesome  effects,  of  the  independent  treasury  system,  thus  entirely 
exploding  the  pretext  which  so  long  deterred  the  people  from  declaring 
a  national  independence  of  the  banks, — that  the  public  revenues  could 
not  be  kept  and  disbursed  without  their  direct  agency. 

In  leaving  the  treasury  free  from  embarrassment,  with  ample 
resources  for  an  economical  administration  for  the  present  year,  you 
have  the  satisfaction  of  having  left  no  grounds  of  just  complaint  to 
your  opponents,  while  you  have  merited  and  secured  the  approbation 
of  your  friends.     Looking  with  entire  confidence  to  the  restoration  and 

*  Correspondence  with  the  Boston  committee,  in  regard  to  his  public  services  as 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  ;  April,  1841. 


PUBLIC  SERVICES  APPRECIATED.  507 

firm  consolidation  of  those  democratic  measures  and  principles  which 
you,  with  the  other  members  of  the  cabinet,  and  the  executive,  have  so 
perseveringly  and  honorably  sustained,  we  are,  with  high  respect,  your 
obedient  servants  and  fellow-citizens, 

CHARLES   A.  MACOMBER,  Chairman,  and 
A.  L.  Cushing,  Secretary  of  the 

Suffolk  Democratic  County  Committee. 


Portsmouth,  17th  April,  1841. 

Gentlemen  :  —  I  beg  you  to  accept  my  best  acknowledgments  for 
the  congratulations  you  offer,  on  my  return  home,  and  the  favorable 
manner  in  which  you  are  pleased  to  speak  of  my  public  services. 

As  the  democratic  committee  for  the  ancient  and  honorable  County 
of  Suffolk,  you  express  views  concerning  the  safety  and  wholesome 
effects  of  the  independent  treasury  which  are  entitled  to  great  respect. 
They  have  certainly  been  confirmed  by  my  own  experience. 

A  national  bank  appears  to  be  the  only  substitute  generally  pro- 
posed by  the  opponents  of  that  system.  But,  aside  from  the  constitu- 
tional objections  to  such  an  institution,  and  the  wide-spread  calamities 
which  have  followed  the  management  of  the  last  one,  if  another  shall 
be  recommended,  on  the  ground  of  its  being  necessary  to  the  fiscal 
operations  of  the  General  Government,  the  democracy  of  the  country 
can,  like  you,  point  to  a  practical  refutation  of  this  pretence.  During 
the  long  period  of  my  official  connection  with  these  operations,  though 
embarrassed  by  extraordinary  commercial  revulsions,  the  very  large 
collections  and  disbursements  were  conducted  with  promptitude,  the 
whole  seven  years,  without  the  aid  of  a  national  bank  for  a  single  day. 

Should  it  be  urged  further,  that  such  a  bank  is  necessary  to  a  sound 
currency  (though  the  General  Government  has  no  power  over  the 
latter,  except  to  coin  money),  the  same  period  furnishes  a  signal  con- 
tradiction to  every  such  argument.  For  that  government,  notwith- 
standing an  opposition  exceedingly  active  and  virulent,  has  succeeded 
in  obtaining  and  using  a  good  currency,  in  all  its  vast,  wide,  and  ram- 
ified concerns,  during  the  whole  period  it  has  ceased  to  employ  a 
national  bank.  Nor  need  any  State  Government  ever  suffer  for  the 
want  of  a  sound  currency,  if  its  Legislature  has  the  wisdom  to  require 
one,  and  its  public  officers  possess  the  firmness  to  enforce  such 
requirements.  The  fault,  as  to  the  currency,  is  occasionally  in  the 
community  itself;  when  overwhelmed  in  debt,  it  yields  to  a  depreciated 
circulating  medium  from  dependence  on  those  who  issue  it,  or  from 
greater  ease  both  in  procuring  it  and  in  extinguishing  with  it  their 
burthensome  liabilities.  At  other  periods,  the  fault  is  in  the  agents 
of  the  community,  who  either  enact  laws  founded  on  bad  theories,  or, 
if  on  good  ones,  fail  to  execute  them  fearlessly  in  bad  times. 

*         OF  THE      ^K 

UNfVERSITY 


508  PUBLIC  SERVICES  APPRECIATED. 

Should  a  national  bank  be  once  more  attempted  to  be  forced  upon  the 
country,  under  a  pretence  of  its  being  necessary  to  sustain  public  credit 
—  (I  mean,  by  credit,  not  mushroom  speculations,  or  bubble  hopes, 
but  real,  honest  confidence,  grounded  on  some  substantial  basis  of 
property,  labor,  or  considerate  enterprise),  —  let  the  same  democracy 
point  to  the  same  period  to  confute  this  pretence  also.  Let  them 
point  to  the  high  pecuniary  standing  of  the  General  Government, 
during  the  last  seven  years,  not  only  -without  the  assistance  of  a 
national  bank,  but  with  all  its  formidable  power  arrayed  in  bitter  hos- 
tility. Yet,  under  such  disadvantages,  that  government  has  gone 
through  some  expensive  wars ;  defrayed  large  current  expenditures ; 
executed  numerous  great  public  works  ;  extinguished  Indian  titles  to 
many  millions  of  acres  of  land ;  paid  off,  instead  of  having  created,  a 
permanent  debt ;  deposited  surplus  millions  with  the  States,  and  sus- 
tained its  credit  so  high  as  to  have  it  sought  from  all  quarters,  in  aid 
of  others,  at  the  close  of  the  late  administration,  to  which  you  so  kindly 
refer.  Without  enlarging  here  on  this  description  of  its  financial 
affairs,  so  different  from  the  fancy  sketch  we  have  often  seen  exhibited 
of  its  great  discredit,  utter  bankruptcy,  and  burthensome  debt  of  forty 
millions,  let  me  ask,  if  this  last  has  been  or  is  the  disordered  condition 
of  its  finances,  how  could  it  have  placed  with  the  States  near  thirty 
millions  of  surplus,  after  defraying  all  its  own  expenses  ?  how  could 
the  assurance  exist  now  to  ask  from  it  millions  more  1  and  how  could 
States  or  capitalists  so  earnestly  seek,  as  better  security,  its  mere 
promises  and  assumptions  for  others,  to  the  extent  of  millions  on  mil- 
lions more? 

Under  our  complex  system,  a  great  mistake  at  home,  as  well  as 
abroad,  often  occurs  from  confounding  the  constitutional  distinctions 
between  the  powers,  rights  and  duties,  of  the  General  and  of  the  State 
Governments.  The  latter  have,  it  is  true,  in  several  instances,  during 
the  above  period,  exhibited  a  picture  of  very  different  hue,  in  respect  to 
monied  affairs,  from  that  of  the  former.  They  must  continue  to  do 
this  till  they  alone  apply  the  proper  remedies,  as  they  alone  possess 
the  legal  power.  The  General  Government,  strictly  limited  by  our 
fathers,  and  with  much  jealousy,  to  a  few  specified  objects,  should,  of 
course,  not  act  beyond  its  assigned  sphere.  If  operating  within  that 
with  fidelity  and  wisdom,  seldom  will  it  fail  to  insure  prosperity  to 
its  own  functions,  and  security  for  all  the  interests  intrusted  to  its 
charge.  But  any  encroachment  on  the  reserved  powers  of  the  States 
tends  inevitably  to  prostrate  every  vestige  of  State  rights,  and,  by 
usurping  authority  not  delegated  either  by  the  people  or  the  States,  it 
betrays  them,  and  is  guilty  of  gross  oppression.  In  such  an  event,  a 
consolidated  government  for  the  whole  Union  must  follow,  and  end  our 
career  in  practical  monarchy,  or  in  disunion  and  miserable  anarchy. 
How  near  we  may  be  to  one  of  these  catastrophes,  time  only  can 
develop. 

But,  as  you  justly  intimate,  come  what  may,  no  event  can  rob  those 


PUBLIC   SERVICES  APPRECIATED.  509 

connected  with  the  last  administration  of  the  General  Government  of 
the  satisfaction  which  results  from  the  eligible  condition  in  which  they 
have  left  its  credit  and  resources,  by  means  chiefly  of  their  scrupulous 
adherence  to  all  the  requirements  of  the  constitution.  By  the  removal 
of  the  deposites  from  the  United  States  Bank,  and  the  adoption  of  the 
independent  treasury,  which  are  usually  cited  by  our  opponents  in 
contravention  of  this  position,  no  powers  were  exercised  except  such  as 
were  expressly  conferred;  and,  at  the  same  time,  the  guards  and 
securities  for  the  public  revenue  have  been  increased.  Instead  of  thus 
uniting  the  powers  over  the  purse  and  the  sword,  they  have  been,  by 
new  legal  provisions,— passed  too  on  executive  recommendation, — more 
thoroughly  separated  than  ever  before ;  and  the  executive  control  over 
the  principal  keepers  of  the  public  money  has  been  diminished,  by 
requiring  the  sanction  of  one  House  of  Congress  to  their  appointment 
in  each  case,  instead  of  leaving  their  selection,  as  formerly,  to  the 
uncontrolled  discretion  of  a  department,  or  the  will  and  caprice  of 
bank  stockholders.  As  one  of  the  administration  which  has  intro- 
duced these  salutary  restrictions,  rather  than  usurped  additional 
powers,  I  return  you  sincere  thanks  for  the  flattering  approbation  you 
are  pleased  to  bestow  on  us  all,  on  account  of  that  measure.  It  was  a 
measure  which  will  bear  the  scrutiny  of  time,  and  was  in  strict  accord- 
ance with  those  democratic  views  of  the  constitution, —  whose  early 
and  wide  restoration  I  can  heartily  unite  with  you  in  desiring,  —  as 
explained  by  Jefferson  and  Madison  themselves  in  the  memorable  con- 
test of  '98,  rather  than  the  opposing  but  open  and  manly  principles 
of  the  Hamiltons  of  that  age,  or  the  false  glosses  since  put  on  the 
former,  whether  by  temporizing  expediency,  unscrupulous  ambition, 
hypocrisy  or  apostasy. 

With  great  respect, 

Your  obedient  servant, 

LEVI  WOODBUKY. 

Charles  A.  Macomber,  Chairman,  and  } 
A.  L.  Cushing,  Secretary  of  the  Suf-  > 
folk  Democratic  Committee.  ) 

43* 


510  GENERAL   PRINCIPLES   OF  FREE   TRADE. 


GENERAL   PRINCIPLES   OF  FREE  TRADE.* 

Several  of  the  ablest  minds  in  the  civilized  world,  during  the  last 
half-century,  have  been  devoted  to  the  discussion  of  the  principles  of 
free  trade.  Little,  therefore,  which  is  original  and  striking,  can  be 
suggested  on  this  topic  at  the  present  day.  But,  from  peculiar  cir- 
cumstances, the  subject  is  not  without  interest  in  this  country ;  and  a 
revision  of  some  of  its  general  principles  may,  on  this  occasion,  do 
some  good  in  helping  to  correct  errors  concerning  them,  both  in  public 
opinion  and  in  legislation. 

The  misapprehensions  about  free  trade  are  here  the  worse  to  cure, 
because  mingled,  in  some  degree,  with  the  creeds  and  prejudices  of 
political  parties.  But  though  painted  so  often  as  a  Gorgon  or  Hydra, 
this  kind  of  trade  seeks,  as  a  general  object,  only  liberty  in  commer- 
cial intercourse.  Is  this  not  reasonable  —  right  ?  Surely,  the  owners 
of  property  ought  to  be  allowed  freely  to  make  exchanges  of  what  is 
their  own.  In  a  free  government,  such  liberty  would  not  seem  to 
imply  anything  either  very  absurd  or  very  criminal.  But  the  oppo- 
nents of  free  trade  wish,  at  times,  either  partially  or  wholly,  to  pro- 
hibit such  exchanges  and  sales ;  at  other  times,  to  confine  them  to  par- 
ticular places,  persons,  or  articles ;  and  at  others,  to  subject  them  to 
regulations  vexatious  in  character,  and  burdens  highly  oppressive. 

Hence,  a  different  meaning  has  been  given  to  free  trade,  in  different 
countries  and  at  different  periods,  according  as  its  friends  are  then 
struggling  against  one  or  another  species  of  restriction.  It  happens 
thus  that  sometimes  the  term  is  applied  to  trade  free  in  all  respects, 
absolutely  and  unconditionally ;  while,  at  others,  it  is  used  in  a  qual- 
ified or  limited  sense,  such  as  trade  free  from  high  taxes  or  unequal 
ones,  and  exempt  from  prohibitions,  as  well  as  regulations  very  onerous 
and  embarrassing.  But  the  express  provisions  in  the  constitution  of 
the  General  Government  are  such  as  to  render  it  unnecessary  to  exam- 
ine here  several  incidental  questions  intimately  connected  with  the  prin- 
ciples of  free  trade  elsewhere.  Among  them  is  one  whether  the  home 
or  foreign  trade  should  be  made  most  free ;  as  here  both  are  alike  per- 
missible by  the  constitution,  and  the  impolicy  of  interfering,  so  as  to 
restrict  or  diminish  either,  is  believed  to  be  clear,  and  will  soon  be  fully 
considered. 

Another  question,  very  material  elsewhere,  is,  how  far  a  tax  on 
exports  conflicts  with  free  trade  ?  But  this  possesses  little  interest 
here ;  as  here  no  burden  is  ever  attempted  to  be  imposed  directly  on 
exports  either  to  foreign  countries  or  neighboring  States,  it  being 
expressly  prohibited  by  the  constitution.  This  is  fortunate;  for 
nothing  short  of  that  wise  prohibition  would  probably  have  been  able 

*A  Lecture  delivered  before  the  "  New  York  Free  Trade  Association,"  March,  1843. 


GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE.  511 

to  prevent  the  disturbing  interference,  long  ere  this,  of  a  system  of 
discriminating  duties  on  exports,  more  sectional,  partisan,  and  odious, 
than  that  which  has  sometimes  burdened  so  heavily  our  imports. 

But,  without  entering  upon  other  details  connected  with  the  pecu- 
liarities concerning  commerce  under  our  forms  of  government,  it  may 
be  useful  to  review  the  general  principles  of  free  trade,  as  applicable 
here,  in  two  separate  aspects, —  one  belonging  to  our  intercourse  and 
exchanges  of  property  at  home,  and  the  other  to  those  abroad.  Re- 
specting the  former,  the  system  of  domestic  commerce  in  this  country 
is  much  freer  than  that  in  most  portions  of  the  world.  We  have  no 
prohibitions  even  as  to  alien  merchants  or  alien  capital  embarking  in 
it.  Nor  does  a  single  restriction  exist  on  our  own  people,  concerning 
their  residences  or  occupations,  like  the  castes  of  India  and  Egypt. 
No  tolls  between  different  States.  No  transit  duties.  No  city  exac- 
tions at  their  gates.  This  is  all  as  it  should  be,  and  as  the  true  prin- 
ciples of  free  trade  demand,  no  less  than  the  advancement  of  our  coun- 
try to  those  high  destinies  which  belong  to,  and  will  thus  accompany,  its 
liberal  institutions  and  great  natural  advantages.  Hence,  the  growth 
of  our  home  trade  has,  thus  far,  been  not  only  larger  than  our  foreign, 
but  unparalleled  in  history.  Untaxed  and  unfettered,  as  to  either  mer- 
chandise, places,  or  persons,  it  has  swollen  so  as  to  create  a  demand, 
from  only  a  few  vessels  at  first,  to  fleets  of  them,  constituting  a  mass 
of  tonnage,  in  the  aggregate,  exceeding  one  million  and  a  quarter. 
This  includes  an  increase,  in  the  way  of  steam- vessels,  from  nothing, 
forty  years  ago,  to  the  vast  number  of  near  a  thousand  now,  and  some 
of  them  as  large  in  size  as  formidable  ships  of  war. 

The  rapid  advance  of  the  tonnage  employed  in  our  domestic  com- 
merce may  be  imputed  by  some  to  the  regulation  requiring  it  to  be 
American ;  but,  in  fact,  the  whole  amount  has  probably  become  no 
greater  than  it  would  have  been,  if  left  entirely  open  and  free ;  since 
the  quantity  of  tonnage  is  varied  by  the  quantity  of  freights  and 
business,  rather  than  they  by  the  tonnage.  This  home  trade,  too,  has 
penetrated  all  our  navigable  rivers,  however  remote ;  stretched  along 
not  only  two  thousand  miles  of  sea-coast,  but  covered  immense  inland 
lakes  —  interior  oceans;  and  it  is  remarkable  how  nearly  it  has 
approached  the  gorges  of  the  Rocky  Mountains,  and  how  eagerly  it 
aspires  to  cross,  by  caravans,  boats,  and  portages,  through  a  line  of 
forts  and  settlements,  even  to  the  Pacific.  This  will  appear  the  more 
striking,  when  we  reflect  that,  less  than  a  century  ago,  our  fathers 
assembled  at  Albany,  as  nigh  a  frontier,  to  plan  the  best  system  of 
colonial  union  for  mutual  defence  against  savage  aggression ;  and  that 
now,  St.  Louis,  a  thousand  miles  further  west  than  Albany,  is  but  a 
halting-place  for  business  and  supplies,  to  be  pushed  still  thousands  of 
miles  further.*     What  but  freedom  —  untrammelled  freedom  —  could 

*  An  anecdote,  illustrating  this,  may  not  be  without  interest.  Only  the  last  autumn, 
I  saw  in  the  family  mansion  of  Mecheck  Weare,  one  of  the  delegates  from  New  Hamp- 
shire to  Albany  on  that  occasion,  the  deer-antlers  brought  home  by  him  from  that 
mission,  and  which  are  carefully  preserved  by  his  daughter,  now  ninety  years  of  age. 


512  GENERAL   PRINCIPLES   OF  FREE   TRADE. 

ever  have  pushed  forward,  with  such  rapidity  and  greatness,  all  this 
immense  interior  trade,  throughout  every  inhabited  portion  of  our  two 
million  and  a  half  miles  of  territory  'I 

The  other  meaning  of  the  term  free  trade,  which  is  interesting  here 
as  a  practical  inquiry,  relates  to  the  liberty  of  commerce  abroad  that 
is  enjoyed  by  the  citizens  of  this  country.  What  is  our  policy  in  that 
respect  ?  what  are  our  rights  1  and  what  are  the  restraints  on  them  by 
usage  or  by  legislation,  whether  at  home  or  abroad  1 

In  relation  to  this  branch  of  commerce,  the  friends  of  free  trade 
here  have  always  advocated  the  largest  liberty.  From  the  start,  the 
whole  American  people,  after  becoming  an  independent  nation,  evinced 
unusual  solicitude  on  this  subject,  in  consequence  of  the  colonial  vas- 
salage which  had  been  long  imposed  on  them,  and  had  restricted  their 
commerce  so  exclusively  to  the  mother  country.  Throwing  off  this, 
with  other  galling  yokes,  their  motto  early  became  that  embodied  so 
beautifully  by  Jefferson,  and  worthy  to  be  set  in  letters  of  gold : 
"Peace  and  friendship  with  all  nations;  entangling  alliances  vrith 
none"  Persevering  in  this,  their  commerce  abroad  was  much  aided 
by  the  long  continuance  of  wars  in  Europe  growing  out  of  the  French 
Revolution ;  and  this  system  and  those  wars,  combined,  flung  into  the 
hands  of  the  United  States,  as  the  greatest  neutral  power,  almost  the 
whole  carrying-trade  of  the  world.  In  only  twelve  or  fifteen  years, 
they  pushed  our  commercial  growth  to  an  extent  unprecedented  in  the 
annals  of  mankind.  They  swelled  the  tonnage  employed  in  trade 
abroad  to  a  greatness  never,  in  our  brilliant  and  most  prosperous 
career,  since  attained  even  by  ourselves,  till  a  few  years  previous  to 
the  present  moment.  They  increased,  in  a  like  manner,  our  commerce 
and  freights.  The  aggregate  of  imports,  for  some  years,  exceeded 
even  the  amount  two  or  three  years  ago,  and  went  many  millions 
beyond  what  it  is  now.  Another  striking  illustration  of  the  portion 
of  this  navigation  under  the  principle  of  free  trade,  and  without  which 
it  could  not  have  existed,  that  has  been  devoted  to  the  business  of 
other  nations  centring  here  (and  not  including  the  freights  by  us 
between  foreign  places),  half  of  our  whole  large  imports  at  that  period 
were  again  exported,  and  carried  to  every  sea  and  people  whose  neces- 
sities, comforts,  or  luxuries,  created  a  demand  for  them. 

This  position,  so  favored  and  fortunate,  became,  at  last,  the  envy  of 
belligerent  Europe ;  and,  uniting  with  other  causes,  provoked  orders 
in  council,  impressments,  Berlin  and  Milan  decrees,  unjust  confisca- 
tions, paper  blockades,  and  a  series  of  tyrannical  sequestrations,  dis- 
figuring history  and  civilization  some  thirty  years  ago.  Then,  for  the 
first  time  since  our  independence,  we  were  compelled  to  defend  our 
rights,  as  a  nation,  to  that  free  trade  on  the  ocean  which  had  been 
found  not  only  so  consonant  to  our  republican  principles,  but  so  con- 
ducive to  our  national  growth.  Then,  for  the  first  time  in  war,  was 
unfurled  to  the  breeze  in  every  sea  that  glorious  flag  bearing  for  its 
motto  the  essence  of  the  whole  contest,  "  Free  Trade  and  Sailors' 


GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE.  513 

Rights."  That  flag  conquered  in  regard  to  this  part  of  the  struggle  ; 
and  in  no  crisis,  during  the  quarter  of  a  century  since,  has  any  power, 
European,  Asiatic,  or  American,  ever  ventured  to  renew  such  a  series 
of  aggressions  against  free  trade.  So  far  from  this,  the  firmness,  per- 
severance, and  inflexible  adherence  to  our  rights,  which  characterized, 
in  that  struggle,  the  great  captain  immortalizing  its  close  at  New 
Orleans,  again  were  displayed  by  him  in  defence  of  the  same  princi- 
ples in  the  public  councils,  while  he  held  the  helm  of  State.  Again, 
too,  it  succeeded ;  and  under  his  administration  -were  secured  indemni- 
ties for  all  those  aggressions  on  our  free  trade  by  every  offending  coun- 
try in  Europe,  where  the  claims  had  not  been  merged  in  actual  hos- 
tilities. 

The  rights  of  neutrals  thus  became  better  understood  over  the  civ- 
ilized world.  The  principles  of  free  trade  became  more  widely  acknowl- 
edged. Liberty  of  intercourse  on  every  sea  is  now,  in  consequence, 
better  protected.  Every  nation  has,  and  exercises  now,  the  same  right 
with  the  haughtiest,  to  make  her  march  "over  the  mountain  wave  — 
her  home  upon  the  deep."  The  ocean  is  now  the  practical,  as  well  as 
theoretical,  highway  of  nations ;  and  any  encroachment  attempted,  in 
this  age,  against  such  freedom,  would  justly  excite,  not  only  an  armed 
neutrality  in  the  north  of  Europe,  but  hostility  over  all  Christendom; 
and  the  national  power,  however  great,  and  circling  the  globe  as  it  may 
with  its  flag,  that  shall  dare  again  to  disturb  a  principle  so  well  settled 
in  national  law  as  free  trade  on  the  ocean, —  whether  she  do  it  by 
orders  in  council,  or  odious  visitations,  or  rights  of  inquiry  pushed  into 
insolent  rights  of  search, —  she  will  arouse  not  only  the  indignation 
of  other  powers,  but  sap  her  own  vast  moral  as  well  as  political  influ- 
ence, and  earlier  fall  unpitied  and  unwept. 

As  soon  as  the  war  of  1812  terminated,  our  sagacious  statesmen 
sought,  by  all  possible  means  consistent  with  public  honor  and  the  pub- 
lic welfare,  to  secure  a  permanent  establishment  of  free  trade  between 
us  and  other  nations.  They  regarded  it  as  the  strongest  security  for 
the  rapid  growth  of  all  our  great  interests.  Mutual  privileges  were 
therefore  invited  and  guaranteed,  treaties  of  reciprocity  encouraged, 
and  the  road  smoothed  in  various  ways  to  that  liberality  in  national 
intercourse  which  is  so  vital  to  prosperity,  letters,  civilization  and 
religion,  as  well  as  freedom.  It  is  destined  to  prove  the  glad  herald 
of  them  all  to  all  people.  This  policy  was  calculated  to  open  the 
eyes  of  the  rest  of  mankind  gradually  to  the  utility  of  promoting 
a  similar  spirit  in  their  foreign  relations.  The  intelligent  and  far- 
seeing  perceived  that  it  would  tend  first  to  abolish  everywhere,  in  com- 
merce, the  substitution  of  mere  might  for  right.  All  oppressive  tolls, 
under  cover  of  sound  dues,  or  light  money,  or  close  seas,  would  in 
time  cease.  All  seizures,  under  the  impotent  plea  of  State  necessities, 
would  be  proscribed,  retaliatory  prohibitions  be  deemed  suicidal,  per- 
manent non-intercourses  be  hooted  at,  and  Japanese  exclusions  be 
prostrated.     In  the  train  of  all  these  reforms  would  come  next  a  spirit 


514  GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE. 

of  enterprise,  truth,  and  reason,  which,  ere  long,  must  penetrate  even 
the  ridges  of  the  Himalaya  Mountains ;  carry  thither  useful  fabrics 
from  abroad  as  freely  as  to  the  Alleghanies.  or  Alps,  or  Andes ;  explore 
thus  the  hidden  recesses  of  China ;  and,  in  time,  open  the  heart  of 
Africa  to  a  liberal  foreign  commerce,  and  accompany  it  with  a  higher 
civilization  in  the  place  of  savage  slavery.  It  will  prove  to  be  the 
only  effective  mode  to  abolish  man-stealing  and  the  traffic  in  human 
blood,  as  it  will  substitute  for  such  atrocities  a  better  and  wiser  code 
of  faith  and  practice ;  cultivate  more  suitable  articles  for  consumption ; 
furnish  better  examples  ;  make  commercial  exchanges  of  the  products 
of  honest  industry,  instead  of  the  captives  of  war  or  the  spoils  of 
plunder ;  as  well  as  cherish,  in  all  things,  a  more  enlightened  sense  of 
right,  duty,  and  humanity. 

Again,  under  such  influences,  we  shall  no  more  behold  a  continental 
system  in  Europe  consigning  to  the  flames  useful  and  costly  merchan- 
dise on  account  of  a  dislike  to  its  origin,  nor  the  condemnation  of 
innocent  neutrals  for  having  unwillingly  been  spoken  to  by  a  belliger- 
ent on  their  voyage,  or  for  using  in  their  cabins  merely  a  carpet  or 
rug  of  hostile  manufacture.  Nor,  again,  shall  we  witness,  in  civilized 
regions,  white  men  kidnapped  by  impressment,  and  forced  to  fight 
against  friends,  or  serve  a  government  they  loathe,  and  defend  princi- 
ples they  abhor.  Indeed,  coursing  over  the  annals  of  all  ages,  we 
shall  find  that  half  their  wars  have  either  originated  from  hostility  to 
free  trade,  or  would  have  been  prevented  had  truer  notions  of  political 
economy  prevailed.  It  is  national  partiality,  unnatural  restraints, 
retaliatory  obstacles,  and  false  theories  and  practices,  of  one  kind  and 
another,  in  trade,  which  oftenest  excite  disaffection  at  first,  then 
complaint,  and,  in  the  end,  collision  and  violence.  Commerce,  like 
water  or  air,  cannot  be  long  deprived  of  a  free  circulation  without  fatal 
maladies  to  business,  as  all  of  them  naturally  and  healthfully  seek  a 
level  or  equilibrium.  If  governments  aim  at  exclusive  privileges  over 
others,  or  attempt  monopolies,  or  resort  to  prohibitory  restrictions  on 
the  exchange  of  useful  articles,  or  throw  fetters  of  any  kind  over  free- 
dom in  foreign  intercourse,  they  often  injure  themselves  the  worst. 
They  cut  off  their  own  people  from  all  those  practical  blessings  of  free 
trade  which  are  neither  few  nor  small;  for  trade  of  that  kind,  as 
defined  by  me,  is  not  what  some  ridicule  as  a  mere  abstraction.  It  is 
not  a  beau  ideal,  never  to  be  realized,  or  Utopian,  but  frequently 
exists,  and  involves  principles  winch  come  home  to  our  business  and 
bosoms  in  daily  life ;  and  if  laws  are  equal,  just,  and  reciprocal,  as 
they  should  be,  those  principles  are  felt  in  the  market-house,  the 
workshop,  and  in  the  street  or  plough-field,  and  on  the  ocean  as  well 
as  the  land.  Hence,  if  we  can  sell  any  of  our  exports  higher  in 
France  than  here  or  in  England,  and  purchase  articles  imported  lower 
in  England  than  here  or  in  France,  is  it  not,  as  a  general  rule,  clearly 
our  interest  to  do  both  ?  Why,  then,  should  laws  or  treaties  be  made 
to  counteract  either  ?     Freedom  of  commerce,  in  this  way,  is  the  life- 


GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE.  515 

blood  to  both  purchaser  and  seller ;  while  restrictions  or  prohibitions, 
under  the  idea  that  all  nations  must  buy  or  sell  at  home  only,  or  buy 
only  where  they  sell,  however  patriotic  in  design,  are  unphilosophical 
and  crude, — are  fatal  to  commerce,  and  sacrifice  the  prosperity  of  the 
wThole  and  the  best  interests  of  society  to  narrow  or  selfish  views. 
One  of  the  least  mischiefs  from  such  a  course  has  been  the  wars  thus 
engendered,  and  the  lives  and  wealth  thus  wasted.  For,  beyond  all 
that,  it  has  been  prolific  in  other  evils.  How  1  It  has  obstructed  the 
wider  diffusion  of  arts  and  letters,  and,  in  many  countries,  retarded 
the  progress  of  civilization  itself  for  centuries.  Indeed,  it  will  be 
found,  through  the  whole  annals  of  the  human  race,  that  all  kinds  of 
improvement  have  been  most  rapid  where  commerce  was  freest  and 
greatest ;  and  that  it  seems  as  useful  to  advance  man  from  barbarism, 
as  are  winds,  waves,  and  steam,  to  promote  navigation.  Without  it, 
as  without  them,  there  may,  to  be  sure,  be  motion  and  intercourse ; 
but  they  would  usually  be  slow,  awkward  and  unprofitable,  rather 
than  forward  and  upward,  in  a  manner  aspiring  to  conquer  all  other 
difficulties,  as  well  as  time  and  space.  You  can  see,  with  a  little  cal- 
culation, that  not  a  tithe  of  the  population  of  many  ancient  and  modern 
cities  could  have  been  maintained  at  all,  much  less  so  highly  improved, 
without  the  aid  of  a  large  and  liberal  foreign  commerce.  And  if  the 
lessons  as  to  the  growth  of  Tyre  and  Carthage,  Venice,  Genoa,  and 
Antwerp,  are  wasted  on  us  as  a  nation ;  if  we  become  exclusive,  cap- 
tious, and  prohibitory,  in  our  intercourse  abroad ;  if  we  move  back- 
wards in  the  cause  of  free  trade,  while  much  of  Europe  is  moving 
onward,  —  yearly  diminishing  some  of  its  rigors,  and  getting  more  of 
our  locomotives  to  facilitate  intercourse,  as  well  as  more  of  our  free 
trade  principles,  —  we  shall,  ere  long,  be  outstripped  in  every  kind  of 
improvement.  We  shall  even  be  distanced,  instead  of  running,  as 
becomes  us  under  our  free  institutions  and  great  natural  advantages, 
first  among  the  foremost  in  all  which  is  progressive,  liberal,  and 
glorious. 

To  be  convinced  that  half  our  elements  of  growth  and  greatness  are 
likely  to  be  lost  if  we  indulge  in  hostility  to  foreign  commerce,  it  is  only 
necessary  to  reflect  a  moment  that  this  kind  of  commerce,  for  which 
freedom  is  desirable  in  the  broadest  sense,  is  that  which  brings  home 
to  us  the  comforts  and  excellences  of  all  climates,  which  carries  ours 
to  all.  It  thus  increases  their  value  and  enriches  us,  while  it  obliges, 
liberalizes  and  improves,  both  ourselves  and  others.  It  is  this  com- 
merce which  found  a  new  world.  It  is  this,  too,  which  opened  a  new 
ocean-path  to  India,  which  doubled  both  the  great  capes  of  both  con- 
tinents, and  is  discovering  the  thousand  islands  of  the  Pacific,  as  well 
as  penetrating  the  icebergs  of  the  poles.  It  is  the  spirit  of  this  com- 
merce which  alone,  as  before  intimated,  can  not  only  carry  high  civil- 
ization into  the  heart  of  Africa,  but  pervade  Japan  and  all  branches 
of  the  Mogul  race,  surmount  the  Chinese  walls  of  high  protection, 
throw  open  one-third  of  the  whole  human  race  to  new  influences,  and 


516  GENERAL   PRINCIPLES   OF   FREE   TRADE. 

diffuse,  permanently,  better  arts,  letters,  and  religion,  among  the  four 
hundred  millions  of  slaves,  bigots,  and  savages,  who  yet  constitute  half 
the  family  of  man.  Religion  may  alone  preach  through  her  devoted 
missionaries,  and  the  schoolmaster  may  wander  abroad  wider  and 
wider ;  but  they  will  avail  little,  unless  the  spirit  of  this  commerce 
precedes  them  as  a  pioneer,  or  accompanies  them  for  defence  and  prac- 
tical blessings,  as  well  as  to  keep  interest  fresh,  and  intercourse  open, 
frequent,  and  durable.  Otherwise,  millions  after  millions  may  con- 
tinue to  die  as  immured  and  unelevated  in  the  scale  of  human  rights, 
as  countless  convents  of  the  Jesuits  have,  for  ages,  in  both  hemispheres 
of  the  globe.  It  is  this  same  spirit,  free,  fearless,  and  indomitable, 
which  has  already  broken  down  the  feudal  system  over  much  of 
Europe  ;  closed,  in  most  places,  the  dungeons  of  the  inquisition  ;  and 
aided  everywhere  to  prostrate  the  idols  of  Paganism,  and  disseminate 
light,  literature,  and  a  purer  faith. 

Another  civilizing  effect  of  foreign  commerce  has  been  colonization, 
and,  in  its  train,  the  substitution  of  refinement  and  arts  for  the  rude- 
ness of  barbarism.  In  the  newly-colonized  regions,  the  plough  soon 
supplants  the  spear, —  the  loom,  the  arrow ;  and  all  the  comforts  of  a 
more  advanced  society  take  the  place  of  the  nakedness,  starvation, 
ignorance,  brutality  and  sufferings,  of  savage  life.  It  is  true  that 
other  objects  have  led  to  the  establishment  of  some  colonies  in  both 
ancient  and  modern  times,  and  others  still  have  been  mixed  up  with 
those  of  commercial  gain ;  but  commerce  has  oftenest  been  the  pre- 
dominant motive,  and,  as  free  or  restricted,  has  pushed  forward,  faster 
or  slower,  an  increase  in  wealth,  numbers,  and  glory.  Eventually,  if 
their  trade  continued  to  be  entrammelled  too  much,  the  love  of  greater 
freedom  has  entirely  prostrated  every  barrier — asserted  independence  ; 
and  a  larger  liberty  in  commerce,  as  well  as  government,  has  not  only 
been  vindicated,  but  bravely  established.  Then,  like  us  in  our  colo- 
nial state,  they  have  taken  their  independent  stand  among  nations ; 
and,  like  us,  in  Greece  from  Egypt,  or  in  Carthage  from  Tyre,  or  the 
south  of  France  and  east  of  Spain  from  older  portions  of  the  shores 
of  the  Mediterranean,  they  have  combated  the  tyranny  of  colonial 
parents,  and,  by  freer  systems  of  trade,  not  only  increased  in  power 
and  fame,  but  proved  able  to  sustain  separate  sovereignties,  and 
advance,  with  rapid  and  improving  strides,  the  destinies  of  our  race. 
In  short,  looking  to  freedom  of  trade  in  foreign  intercourse,  each 
nation  best  promotes  its  own  interests  in  a  durable  manner,  by  allow- 
ing every  other  one  in  that  respect  to  be  equal,  and  establishing  such 
free  communication  between  each  as  ought  to  exist  between  individ- 
uals of  the  same  nation. 

We  are  accustomed,  in  commendation,  to  speak  of  the  great  republic 
of  letters ;  but  commerce  forms  a  republic  still  wider.  It  often  pre- 
cedes, and  always  fosters  letters.  It  defends,  as  well  as  often  diffuses, 
a  purer  religion  ;  and  is  out  of  place  if  it  tolerates  either  political  ine- 
quality or  social  injustice.      Obstacles  to  the  free  intercommunication 


GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OP  FREE  TRADE.  517 

of  all  people,  and  the  free  interchange,  among  all,  of  what  each  may 
need  and  each  can  spare  of  the  surplus  productions  of  each,  not  only 
vanish  before  it,  but,  till  this  liberal  intercourse  is  established,  all 
climates,  soils,  and  pursuits,  are  not  united  as  a  whole  in  the  sympa- 
thies and  benefits  which  should  bind  together  the  human  family,  and 
are  not,  as  duty  requires,  perfecting  as  much  as  possible  the  whole,  by 
making  each  part  beneficial  and  cooperating.  Till  then,  the  strongest 
guaranty  of  peace  and  security  against  war  is  not  obtained  by  render- 
ing it  injurious  to  each  nation  mutually  to  disturb  the  commerce  or 
tranquillity  of  any  other,  bound  together,  as  they  would  then  be,  in 
the  golden  chains  of  reciprocal  and  useful  trade. 

Leaving  any  further  consideration,  separately,  of  the  true  principles 
of  free  trade  as  connected  either  with  our  domestic  or  foreign  inter- 
course, I  hasten  to  the  only  remaining  branch  of  the  subject  proposed 
to  be  reviewed  on  this  occasion.  It  relates  to  a  matter  of  no  less 
interest  than  the  regulations  which  governments  possess  the  right,  and 
which  it  is  expedient,  to  make  within  their  limits,  bearing  indirectly  on 
freedom  of  trade,  whether  interior  or  exterior.  It  is,  whether  those 
regulations  ought  to  be  liberal  or  contracted,  equal  and  impartial,  or 
the  reverse,  free  or  slavish  ;  and  when  not  free,  but  shackled  by  par- 
tial privileges,  prohibitions,  unjust  discriminations,  and  other  kinds  of 
interference,  invidious  and  fallacious,  what  are  their  fatal  tendencies  to 
society  at  large  and  all  its  best  interests,  as  well  as  to  commerce  ? 

In  this  view  of  the  subject,  the  true  principles  of  free  trade  require 
that  every  citizen  be  allowed  to  embark  in  the  business  of  commerce, 
no  less  than  in  every  other  honest  pursuit.  There  should  be  no  dis- 
franchisements on  account  of  birth  or  residence,  no  personal  vetoes,  no 
tabooing  of  different  sections  of  the  country,  no  monopoly  in  families, 
tribes,  or  particular  cities,  no  long  apprenticeships  exacted  servilely 
as  a  right.  Skill  in  business,  I  concede,  is  desirable,  and  morals  and 
intelligence ;  but  these,  certainly,  are  better  secured  by  the  stimulus 
of  free  rivalship,  and  the  rewards  of  free  enterprise,  than  by  any  rigor- 
ous exclusions.  All  employments  not  open  to  all  are  likewise  aristo- 
cratic in  spirit,  as  well  as  unequal  in  operation ;  and  they  can  more 
properly  be  tolerated  in  monarchical  governments,  where  they  originate 
and  prevail  most,  than  in  those  where  all  men  are  born  equal,  and 
possess  an  equal  right  to  seek  subsistence  and  happiness  in  the  manner 
most  agreeable  to  each.  Laws,  by  partiality,  may  become  as  great 
tyrants  as  men  ;  and  bad  legislation  is  a  more  wide-spread  and  deep- 
seated  curse  than  any  bad  execution  of  laws.  If  one  class  is  robbed, 
by  law,  to  build  up  or  enrich  another,  it  is  still  a  species  of  robbery, 
and  is  no  less  unjust  suffering  than  to  be  robbed  without  law.  So,  if 
one  section  of  a  common  country,  or  one  branch  of  industry,  is  ren- 
dered tributary  to  others  by  a  course  of  unequal  legislation,  the  slavery 
is  as  oppressive  and  intolerable  as  if  inflicted  by  the  actual  scourge,  the 
dungeon,  or  the  chain. 

The  violation  of  the  principles  of  free  trade,  if  caused  by  the  restrict- 
44 


518  GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE. 

ive  course  of  some  nations  as  to  the  commerce  and  other  pursuits  of 
all  their  subjects,  is  more  endurable  than  when  it  is  practised  only 
towards  particular  classes  or  employments.  When  the  whole  commu- 
nity choose  to  let  rulers  regulate  the  occupations  and  intercourse  of 
the  whole,  either  among  themselves  or  abroad,  all  will  naturally  sub- 
mit with  more  calmness  to  privations  which  are  general  and  common 
to  all.  Hence  it  is  that  the  citizen  of  Canton  or  Pekin  cares  but 
little  for  free  trade,  and  as  little  does  the  merchant  of  Japan,  or  a 
bazaar-owner  in  Constantinople ;  because  they  see  around  them  all 
others  equally  restrained,  and  because  they  are  humbled  by  despotism 
to  submit,  in  all  such  matters,  to  the  dictation  of  their  rulers.  At  the 
same  time,  tyrants  think  as  highly  of  their  own  wisdom  in  all  things 
as  their  slaves  can ;  and  hence  the  Pacha  of  Egypt  flatters  himself  with 
being  as  much  better  a  farmer,  merchant,  and  cotton-spinner,  than  any 
of  his  subjects,  as  he  is  more  powerful ;  and  he  presumes  to  regulate 
business  for  them,  or  to  transact  it  himself  in  their  behalf,  as  coolly 
and  arbitrarily  as  would  any  Pharaoh  have  done  it  thirty  centuries 
ago.  In  that  country,  once  the  pride  of  the  civilized  world,  more  than 
half  its  population  have  been  extirpated,  within  a  few  years,  by  such  a 
system  of  misgovernment,  and  by  wars  in  which  the  people  had  no 
voice  but  that  of  suffering.  But,  under  institutions  like  ours,  formed 
by  the  people  and  not  their  rulers,  —  for  the  people  and  not  their 
rulers,  —  no  power  should  be  confided  to  the  latter  to  discriminate,  in 
any  way,  between  different  occupations,  classes,  or  sections.  All  leg- 
islation ought,  therefore,  to  be  equal ;  and  if  the  constitution  of  any 
State  enables  its  officers  to  favor  particular  branches  of  industry,  noth- 
ing of  the  kind  is  expressly  conferred  on  the  General  Government. 
The  error  on  this  point  often  arises  from  hastily  taking  it  for  granted 
that  this  last  government  possesses  all  the  broad  authority  of  that  of 
England  or  Spain;  while,  in  truth,  it  is  much  limited,  and  it  is  the 
governments  of  the  States  which,  for  all  domestic  purposes,  more 
resemble  those  abroad;  though  the  State  officers,  at  times,  are  jealously 
restrained  by  their  people,  through  provisions  in  their  own  constitu- 
tions, from  any  partial,  unequal,  or  exclusive  legislation. 

But,  beside  the  fact  that  no  right  is  expressly  granted  to  Congress 
to  prohibit  freedom  of  trade,  the  expediency  of  preserving  such  free- 
dom here  is  so  manifest,  from  the  character  of  all  our  institutions  and 
the  dangerous  consequences  of  an  opposite  policy,  as  to  repel  any 
implication  of  such  a  right ;  for,  if  you  permit  discriminations  and 
exclusive  privileges  in  one  thing,  the  door  is  open  to  them  in  others, 
and  thus  the  vitality  of  a  government  of  equal  rights  and  equal  laws  is 
destroyed.  The  example  of  such  invidious  favoritism  is  not  only  in 
other  ways  pernicious,  but,  by  provoking  complaint  and  reaction,  it  is 
suicidal  of  all  the  permanent  advantages  contemplated.  The  efforts 
and  success  of  the  community,  as  a  whole,  are  also  weakened  by  it. 
The  energies  of  every  citizen  do  not  run  in  their  most  natural  channel, 
and  hence  not  with  full ,  force  or  rapidity.      There  is,  likewise,  less 


GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE.  519 

cordiality  and  cooperation.  Jealousies  are  sown  deep,  heart-burnings 
excited,  and  the  public  harmony  disturbed,  if  actual  violence  does  not 
break  out.  In  this  way,  rather  than  promoting  the  greatest  good  of 
the  greatest  number,  —  the  legitimate  object  of  all  government,  —  the 
aim  seems  to  be  the  good  of  a  few,  the  elevation  of  a  few,  and  the  rule 
of  a  few,  over  others  equal  by  nature  as  well  as  constitutional  rights, 
and  often  in  all  useful  acquirements.  The  hearts  of  freemen,  no  less 
than  their  judgments,  rebel  at  such  injustice.  The  opponents  of  free 
trade,  therefore,  attempt  in  various  ways  to  justify  their  course ;  and 
it  is  due  to  the  vindication  of  our  own  principles,  as  well  as  candor  and 
justice  towards  others,  to  notice  as  many  of  their  arguments  as  time 
will  permit. 

One  of  their  grounds  of  defence  is  placed  on  a  right,  given  by  the 
constitution,  to  regulate  commerce  and  impose  taxes.  But  the  power 
to  regulate  is  not  a  power  to  destroy.  An  authority  to  regulate  com- 
merce is,  therefore,  not  one  to  prohibit  it.  Regulations  must  also  be 
uniform  and  equal,  rather  than  partial  and  exclusive,  like  the  present 
tariff.  In  short,  their  design,  when  applied  to  trade,  should  be  to 
encourage  rather  than  lessen  it,  and  to  impose  no  restraints  but  such 
as  are  necessary  to  secure  the  public  health,  public  morals,  and  the 
safe  collection  of  the  public  revenue.  I  do  not  deny,  to  scarcely  any 
government,  powers  like  these  last ;  and,  if  fairly  exercised,  they  may, 
without  injury,  be  extended  in  almost  every  country  to  the  exclusion 
of  imports  of  poisonous  drugs, — as,  in  China,  of  opium,  and  as  here  of 
obscene  prints.  But  too  much  regulation,  as  to  anything,  is  intrusive, 
vexatious,  odious ;  and  the  exact  limits  of  such  powers,  in  point  of 
either  right  or  expediency,  are  somewhat  difficult  to  define,  and  need 
not  be  examined  further,  on  this  occasion,  for  any  practical  object  con- 
nected with  free  trade. 

But  the  other  power,  to  impose  taxes,  is  most  relied  on  by  our 
opponents.  Being  one  that  is  necessary  in  all  governments,  it  is,  from 
the  wide  generality  of  its  use,  more  likely  to  be  perverted ;  and  has, 
in  fact,  been  repeatedly  subjected  to  abuses,  which  have  impaired  free 
trade  both  at  home  and  abroad.  It  therefore  requires  greater  watch- 
fulness, and  closer  consideration.  The  usual  method  of  applying  it,  so 
as  to  trench  on  the  established  principles  of  free  trade,  is  by  imposing 
unequal  duties  on  the  imports  of  foreign  merchandise.  This  comes 
into  operation  in  a  manner  directly  unfavorable  to  our  foreign  com- 
merce ;  and  as  those  duties  indirectly  reach,  to  some  extent,  our  exports, 
such  a  tariff  bears  some  on  the  domestic,  as  well  as  foreign  trade. 
Without  going  here  into  the  examination  how  far  the  theory  be  sound, 
that  all  the  burden  of  a  tariff  falls  circuitously  on  the  exports,  it  is 
certain  that  much  of  it  falls  on  them,  if  it  affects,  in  common,  all  who 
consume  the  imports,  since  the  producers  of  the  former  are  the  largest 
consumers  of  the  latter.  The  right,  however,  to  assess  some  duties  on 
imports  is  not  doubted  by  me,  because  it  is  expressly  granted  in  the 
constitution ;  but  the  expediency  of  exercising  it  on  ordinary  occasions. 


520  GENERAL   PRINCIPLES   OF   FREE   TRADE. 

if  at  all,  has  been  questioned  by  many  on  the  very  plausible  grounds 
that  it  falls  in  too  large  a  proportion  on  the  middling  and  poorer 
classes,  who  consume  nearly  as  much  of  imports,  per  head,  as  the  rich ; 
that  it  is  very  open  to  partiality,  by  means  of  the  high  discriminations 
often  introduced  between  the  amounts  of  duty  on  different  articles ; 
and  that  it  is  felt  but  indirectly  by  the  community  (though  the  burden 
in  the  end  is  quite  as  great  as  in  the  other  forms  of  taxation),  and 
hence  any  extravagance  in  expense  leading  to  it  is  less  noticed  and 
checked.  Yet  the  States  having  taxed  imports  to  some  extent  before 
they  parted  with  the  power  entirely  to  the  General  Government,  and 
the  latter  having  always  used  it  since,  while  the  States  continue  to 
resort  to  other  modes  of  taxation,  the  inference  seems  fair  that  a  tariff 
imposed  by  Congress  to  collect  revenue  is  not  only  constitutional,  but 
if  equal,  proportionate,  and  needed,  may  be  expedient.  These  qualifi- 
cations and  limitations  indicate  the  extent  to  which  such  a  tax  is  per- 
missible, as  well  as  consistent  with  the  principles  of  free  trade ;  because 
a  tariff  on  imports,  not  much  exceeding  the  tax  levied  on  other  kinds 
of  property  by  the  States  or  the  General  Government,  does  not  prevent 
trade  from  being  equally  free  with  all  other  kinds  of  business.  Nor  is 
such  taxation  unjust ;  for,  when  equal,  it  treats  all  with  like  favor, 
and  merely  makes  all  pay,  as  all  should,  in  a  just  ratio,  for  the  ordi- 
nary protection  of  life,  liberty,  and  all  kinds  of  property. 

The  true  practical  motto,  then,  in  my  opinion,  where  taxation 
becomes  indispensable  to  maintain  an  economical  administration  of  the 
government,  is,  not  "free  trade  and  no  duties,"  but  "free  trade  and 
low  duties;"  the  latter  being  no  higher  than  what  is  required  for  rev- 
enue alone,  and  only  in  due  proportion  to  the  tax  which  is  generally 
imposed  on  other  property  in  the  country,  under  our  mixed  forms  of 
government.  If  more  revenue  be  wanted  than  this  will  yield,  it,  of 
course,  should  be  collected  equally  from  other  sources,  as  well  as  this. 
But  while  the  ordinary  rate  of  taxation  on  most  other  property  is  not, 
by  the  States,  over  five  per  cent,  on  its  value,  and  often  not  one,  the 
existing  tariff  is  seldom  less  than  twenty  per  cent.,  and,  in  some  cases, 
is  forty,  eighty,  and  even  a  hundred  per  cent. ;  and  these  highest  not, 
in  most  cases,  on  either  luxuries  or  articles  prejudicial  to  health  and 
morals,  but  on  such  great  necessaries  of  life  to  the  humbler  classes  as 
cottons,  sugar,  salt,  and  some  kinds  of  iron.  So,  while  the  tariff  in 
some  States,  before  the  constitution  was  formed,  did  not  exceed  three 
per  cent.,  and  in  none  ten,  and,  for  many  years  after,  seldom  equalled 
on  any  articles  twenty,  yet  now,  after  a  return  from  high  excesses  to 
something  like  twenty,  and  on  half  our  imports  still  lower, —  and  after 
other  nations,  under  our  example  and  their  own  experience,  were 
reducing  their  duties  to  a  like  moderate  standard, — it  is  surely  calcu- 
lated to  alarm  the  friends  of  free  trade,  all  the  world  over,  to  see  a  tax 
on  imports  suddenly  raised  on  almost  every  article  to  more  than  quad- 
ruple that  which  is  usually  paid  on  other  property — to  an  amount  far 
beyond  any  precedent  here  when  the  constitution  was  formed,  and  to 


GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE.  521 

be  vindicated  in  its  high  discriminations  only  by  the  notions  of  darker 
ages  than  this  in  the  science  of  political  economy. 

Another  justification  for  such  an  outrage  on  all  fair  principles  of 
taxation,  as  well  as  of  free  trade,  is  claimed  by  our  opponents  to  be, 
the  right  to  give  that  peculiar  protection  to  domestic  manufactures 
which  such  a  course  confers.  But,  as  before  explained,  this  can  never 
be  vindicated  under  a  constitution  which  authorizes  a  tax  for  no  pur- 
poses but  to  pay  the  public  expenses,  and  then  only  in  a  uniform  and 
equal  manner;  and  nowhere  confers  authority,  in  any  way,  to  give 
peculiar  protection  to  manufactures,  or  any  other  branch  of  industry. 
On  the  contrary,  such  protection  is  left  to  the  separate  States,  accord- 
ing to  their  several  local  interests,  if  it  should  be  exercised  anywhere. 
For  anywhere,  when  exercised  in  favor  of  one  class  alone,  it  usually 
opens  a  Pandora's  box  of  evils  as  to  the  rest ;  and  when  exercised  for 
all  alike,  it  ceases  to  be  peculiar,  and  becomes  nugatory  as  a  special 
advantage  to  any.  It  is  no  apology  to  argue  further,  as  is  sometimes 
done  in  palliation  of  exclusive  protection,  that  it  will  be  needed  only  a 
few  years.  If  wrong,  it  should  not  be  granted  at  all ;  and  experience 
shows  that,  instead  of  being  desired  but  temporarily,  it  is  sought  with 
as  much  importunity  now  as  it  was  twenty  years  ago. 

But  our  opponents  again  ask,  in  words  most  siren-like  to  the  patri- 
otic, would  you  refuse  protection  to  American  industry  and  home 
labor?  I  answer, — by  no  means;  but  let  that  protection  be  made 
equal  to  all,  and  not  exclusive  for  a  few.  Grant  it  by  equal  laws, 
where  the  rights  of  all  are  equal ;  as  the  justice  that  should  reign 
among  moral  and  intelligent  republicans ;  and  the  only  justice,  though 
the  heavens  fall.  If  any  partiality  or  inequality  could  be  justified,  it 
would  certainly  be  in  favor  of  agriculture,  rather  than  manufactures, 
as  that  gives  employment  to  more  than  four  times  the  number  of  per- 
sons and  ten  times  the  amount  of  capital,  and  is  second,  in  virtue  and 
patriotism,  to  no  other  pursuit. 

How  proudly,  also,  does  commerce  contrast  with  either  in  several 
respects  already  alluded  to  !  and  beyond  even  them,  as  the  foundation 
of  all  maritime  strength  and  naval  defence,  how  fatally  is  it  under- 
mined by  a  hostile  tariff!  and  how  greatly  is  thus  endangered  the 
attainment  of  those  high  destinies  that  have  just  been  within  our 
grasp,  as  the  second  power  in  the  world  on  the  ocean  !  Such  a  nar- 
row policy  looks  more  in  keeping  with  the  monkish  bigotry  of  the 
eighth  century  than  the  light  and  statesmanship  of  the  nineteenth ; 
and  I  am  happy  to  admit  that,  in  theory,  it  is  disavowed  by  many  of 
our  opponents.  But  it  inevitably  occurs  in  practice  by  their  system 
as  a  system,  because  it  disturbs  the  natural  employment  of  both  cap- 
ital and  labor ;  forces  them  into  new  and  artificial  channels,  by  encour- 
aging one  branch  of  business  and  overburdening  others ;  and,  by  being 
prohibitory  of  some  foreign  articles,  it  provokes  retaliations  from 
abroad,  as  well  as  weakens  the  interests  neglected  at  home,  and  alien- 
ates here  the  attachment  of  large  classes  and  sections. 
44* 


522  GENERAL   PRINCIPLES   OF   FREE   TRADE. 

Such  a  fatal  course  is  the  more  objectionable,  because  so  unneces- 
sary. The  manufacturers,  in  common  with  other  classes,  and  without 
any  special  favor,  always  enjoy  a  liberal  incidental  protection.  It  is 
obtained  first  by  the  expense  of  transporting  hither,  at  so  great  a 
distance,  all  foreign  articles.  Beside  this,  they  have  the  additional 
protection  of  any  equal  duties.  These,  at  only  twenty  per  cent., 
will  alone  amount  to  one-fifth  of  the  whole  value  of  the  foreign  pro- 
duction ;  and  if  so  great  a  protection  as  that,  and  the  cost  of  freights 
from  abroad,  united,  will  not  secure  success  here  in  any  particular 
business,  is  it  not  strong  presumptive  evidence  that  such  business  is 
of  a  hot-bed  character  1  one  not  well  suited  to  our  climate,  tastes, 
habits,  or  skill  1  and  which,  like  the  growth  of  silk  in  our  provincial 
condition,  notwithstanding  high  bounties,  may  fail,  till  we  are  riper  in 
those  other  qualifications  so  very  indispensable  1  It  is  those  tastes, 
habits,  and  skill,  with  suitable  climate  and  other  natural  advantages, 
on  which  alone  we  can  safely  rely ;  and  they  will  always  succeed  bet- 
ter, seconded  by  a  steady,  uniform  policy  in  legislation,  by  free  trade 
and  low  duties,  than  the  highest  and  a  vacillating  system.  Still  other 
pretences,  thrust  forward,  at  times,  in  favor  of  partial  distinctions  in 
legislation,  are  alike  untenable.  Of  this  character  are  discriminating 
laws,  made  with  a  view  to  change  the  balance  of  foreign  trade, — so  to 
keep  more  gold  and  silver  in  the  country,  secure  from  exportation, — 
so  to  lessen  the  trade  with  those  particular  nations  who  take  least 
directly  of  our  own  products, — so  to  alter  the  rates  of  exchanges, 
which  are  fixed  from  time  to  time  by  the  great  laws  of  trade,  as  surely 
as  the  ebb  and  flow  of  the  tides  are  fixed  by  the  great  laws  of  nature. 
These  are  all  a  litter  of  the  same  lame  and  impotent  breed,  from  the 
same  obsolete  school.  So  to  regulate  prices,  and,  as  some  absurdly 
reason,  to  impose  a  larger  duty  in  order  to  reduce  the  price  of  the 
article  taxed.  How  would  such  a  pretence  be  ridiculed  in  the  case  of 
ordinary  taxes  in  the  States  !  And  if  a  higher  tariff  lessens  the  price, 
why  not  impose  five  hundred  per  cent.,  rather  than  fifty?  and  why  not 
retaliate  on  other  governments,  by  lowering  instead  of  raising  duties  ? 
The  fact  that  prices  sometimes  fall  after  a  tariff  is  made  higher  does 
not  conflict  at  all  with  this  conclusion ;  because  they  fall  from  other 
causes,  such  as  improvements  in  machinery,  greater  skill,  or  scarcity 
of  money ;  and  they  fall  on  free  goods,  as  well  as  those  which  are  duti- 
able. In  brief,  it  would  be  quite  as  wise  for  governments  to  attempt 
to  regulate,  by  legislation,  the  quantity  of  corn  or  hay  to  be  grown 
per  acre,  as  to  regulate,  in  that  way,  most  matters  of  trade.  Gov- 
ernment may  very  properly  prescribe  a  just  standard  of  value, 
and  the  kind  of  money,  or  other  articles,  it  is  willing  to  receive  for 
its  own  dues ;  and  it  may  even  manufacture  such  a  circulation  as  it 
deems  the  most  useful.  But  free  trade  regards  everything  as  a  matter 
of  exchange, — of  value  against  value.  Its  prices  cannot  be  justly 
affected  by  arbitrary  legislation.     The  rules  for  the  adjustment  and 


GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE.  523 

enforcement  of  contracts  may  be  regulated ;  but  the  exchanges  of  trade 
are  in  themselves  generally  beyond  any  salutary  control,  except  the 
agreement  of  parties  and  the  instinct  of  individual  interests. 

Without  the  imputation  of  any  personal  claims  in  a  matter  of  his- 
tory, I  may  be  allowed  to  add  that  the  attempt  made  here,  a  few  years 
ago,  to  dispense  with  the  sound  constitutional  standard  of  value,  both 
in  the  business  of  the  government  and  in  private  contracts,  as  well  as 
in  exchanges,  was  fortunately  resisted,  and  ultimately  with  signal  suc- 
cess. The  inviolability  of  contracts,  the  public  faith,  and  the  credit  of 
the  General  Government,  were  thus  preserved  unbroken  amidst  a  press- 
ure unexampled  in  severity,  and  with  advantages  to  the  eventual 
soundness  of  the  currency  over  the  whole  country  which  all  parts  are 
now  reaping,  and  which,  otherwise,  were  likely  to  have  been  lost  for  a 
quarter  of  a  century.  No  stronger  proof  of  a  portion  of  this  can  exist 
than  the  fact,  that  the  rate  of  exchanges,  both  foreign  and  domestic, 
was  never  lower  than  at  the  present  moment.  There  exist  several 
other  objections  among  the  friends  of  free  trade  to  the  system  of  a  high 
tariff,  as  well  as  to  officious  interference  in  business  by  law,  a  few  of 
which  only  is  there  time  left  to  specify,  even  in  a  condensed  form. 

Beside  being  thus  forced  to  pay  a  higher  price  than  would  other- 
wise be  asked  for  foreign  products,  the  people  are  compelled  to  pay 
more  for  like  domestic  articles,  or  no  special  protection  is  gained  for 
them,  and  thus  consumers  are  doubly  fleeced.  Again,  while  some 
nations  are  reducing  duties  on  many  imports,  and  especially  grain,  so 
that  an  additional  market  is  thus  made  for  ours,  and  the  whole  trans- 
portation of  ours  is  thrown  more  into  American  vessels,  instead  of  a 
large  part  of  the  carriage  of  most  of  it  being,  as  before,  through  colo- 
nies in  foreign  bottoms,  we,  by  the  late  tariff,  repel  such  liberal 
advances.  We  refuse  to  offer  a  reciprocal  scale  of  low  duties,  and 
rashly  raise  ours  much  higher  on  almost  every  article  to  be  imported 
thence,  in  return  for  our  meats,  and  bread-stuffs,  and  raw  cotton.  We 
thus  endeavor  to  diminish  those  very  imports  which  have  always  given 
so  much  and  so  profitable  employment  to  American  tonnage  engaged 
in  the  foreign  trade.  Such  a  course  Adam  Smith,  near  a  century  ago, 
pronounced  to  be  "  evidently  as  destructive  to  the  revenue  of  the  cus- 
toms as  to  freedom  in  trade,"  and  on  both  accounts  to  deserve  reproba- 
tion. 

In  that  very  law,  also,  we  have  taxed  higher  almost  every  article 
which  enters  into  ship-building,  and  have  thus  radically  impaired  our 
ability  to  compete,  so  successfully  as  before,  for  the  carrying-trade  of 
the  world.  In  the  same  way  we  have  inflicted  a  vital  injury  on  the 
fisheries, —  that  noble  nursery  of  naval  as  well  as  commercial  great- 
ness,—  because,  without  adding  anything  to  the  bounty  or  drawback, 
we  have  increased  the  cost  of  their  vessels  much  beyond  what  it  oth- 
erwise would  be,  by  placing  duties  on  the  iron,  duck,  and  cordage, 
used  in  them,  and  on  the  salt  consumed,  much  higher  than  what  existed 


524  GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE. 

originally,  when  the  bounty  was  fixed  or  computed.  Indeed,  by  this 
policy,  we  impose  a  new  tax  on  the  very  tools  of  their  trade  or  occu- 
pation, and  overburden  the  employment  by  which  they  earn  their  daily 
bread.  What  a  specimen  of  the  kindness  evinced  towards  interests  so 
depressed  as  those  of  navigation  and  the  fisheries, — interests  whose 
great  encouragement  has  heretofore  been  that  free  trade  and  sailors' 
rights  for  which  they  fought  with  such  brilliant  glory  during  the  last 
war  !  While  many  of  the  raw  materials  used  in  manufactures  are  left 
frse,  or  at  a  low  duty,  not  only  all  but  one  used  in  ship-building  are 
taxed  higher,  but  most  of  the  foreign  articles  eaten  and  worn  by  the 
mechanics  and  seamen  thus  employed.  Another  view  of  the  unfavor- 
able bearing  of  the  present  tariff  on  our  tonnage  is,  that  the  increased 
duties  only  on  the  articles  used  in  building  and  repairs  are  computed 
by  some  to  equal  near  five  dollars  a  ton.  The  consequence  is,  that  all 
our  vessels  engaged  in  the  foreign  trade  are  to  suffer  hereafter  such 
additional  taxation.  How  is  it  possible,  then,  for  them  to  compete 
so  well  as  before  with  the  vessels  of  other  nations,  whose  tariffs  have 
not  been  raised  1  Our  domestic  tonnage  feels  it  the  least,  because  that 
is  not  exposed  to  rivalship  from  abroad ;  and  hence  can  raise  the  price 
of  freights,  and  thus  obtain  some  indemnity,  though,  unfortunately,  in 
most  cases,  from  our  own  citizens.  But  if  our  vessels  in  the  foreign 
trade  attempt  this  mode  of  relief,  the  ships  of  other  nations  are  ready 
to  carry  at  the  old  price  with  profit,  and  thus  our  own  tonnage  remains 
unemployed,  or  is  obliged  to  work  at  ruinously  low  rates. 

Another  objection  to  this  kind  of  legislation  is,  that  it  resumes  what 
was  called  the  mercantile  system  a  century  or  two  ago,  and  which  was 
brought  into  discredit  under  the  increased  lights  of  reason  and  expe- 
rience. The  manufacturers  are  thus,  at  the  present  moment,  wearing 
the  cast-off  clothing  of  the  merchants. 

Another  objection  is,  that,  by  this  vicious  system,  the  greatest  nec- 
essaries of  life  are  the  most  burdened,  and  some  luxuries  the  least. 
The  very  highest  duties,  instead  of  falling  on  the  wines,  the  silks  and 
laces,  of  the  rich,  fasten  themselves,  like  harpies,  on  the  tools,  food 
and  clothing,  of  the  poorer  classes.  By  this  mode  of  taxing  necessa- 
ries, as  well  as  luxuries,  consumption  cannot  be  avoided,  and  the  bur- 
den of  the  tax  escaped  by  those  least  able  to  pay  it,  unless  they  can 
go  without  both  food  and  clothes.  Hence,  it  operates  as  a  high  and 
oppressive  poll-tax  in  disguise  ;  the  middling  interest  in  society  con- 
tributing nearly  as  much  from  small  incomes,  as  the  wealthy  do  from 
large  ones.  This  is  the  very  worst  species  of  income  tax,  and,  beside 
all  such  unjust  disproportion,  falls,  at  first,  on  business  itself  as  much 
as  on  property, —  on  mere  sales  and  purchases, —  and,  therefore,  tends 
to  check  them,  and  all  the  enterprise,  industry,  and  commerce  of  fife, 
connected  with  them. 

Another  objection  is,  that,  by  the  experience  of  all  ages,  govern- 
ments prove  to  be  not  so  wise  in  regulating  either  the  trade  or  pursuits 
of  individuals,  as  the  latter  are  when  left  to  themselves.     To  regulate 


GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE.  525 

prices  by  law,  directly,  was  once  quite  as  popular  as  it  is  now,  with 
some  politicians,  to  influence  them  in  that  way  indirectly,  and  control 
other  matters  of  private  business.  But  the  latter  is  a  doctrine  from 
the  same  school  as  the  former,  and  should  be  exploded,  as  that  has 
been,  for  its  despotic  folly.  If  unmolested,  people  will  generally  sell 
where  they  can  get  most,  and  buy  where  they  must  give  least ;  and 
this  instinct  of  trade  — this  impulse  of  self-interest  —  not  only  prompts 
and  justifies  free  commerce,  but  aids  both  national  and  individual  pros- 
perity. The  more  each  thus  gains,  the  more  the  whole  gain ;  and,  if 
liberty  in  trade  is  interrupted,  so  that  you  cannot  buy  where  articles 
are  cheapest,  the  interruption  is  usually  pushed  so  that  you  cannot 
sell  where  you  are  able  to  get  most ;  and  hence  much  is  lost  both 
ways,  beside  embarrassment  and  delay.  It  is  obvious  that,  under  the 
doctrine  of  free  trade,  the  profit  would  be  quite  as  much  to  purchase 
abroad  cheaper  either  sugar,  salt,  iron,  or  woollens,  as  to  sell  abroad 
higher  either  our  grain,  tobacco,  cotton,  pork,  or  even  manufactured 
goods.  Nor  is  such  a  kind  of  business  overreaching  or  disadvantageous 
to  others,  as  it  confers  mutual  benefits ;  the  trade  consisting  often  of 
surpluses,  which  otherwise  would  not  be  produced,  or  would  be  much 
less  valuable.  Nor  is  it  justly  open  to  a  specious  exception,  that  arti- 
cles procured  abroad  are  not  the  result  of  our  own  industry,  and  should 
therefore  be  proscribed.  For,  whatever  is  bought  on  the  other  side 
of  the  Atlantic,  and  paid  for  by  our  exports,  is  the  fruit  of  American 
labor,  as  much  as  if  bought  or  produced  in  the  United  States.  Nor 
does  it  matter  whether  the  articles  are  obtained  in  direct  exchange  for 
others,  or  with  money  procured  by  the  sale  of  others,  originating  here. 
In  either  case,  they  are  gotten  by  means  of  sweat,  toil,  and  enterprise 
here :  and  in  either  case,  if,  as  before  supposed,  the  sales  are  higher 
and  the  purchases  lower  than  here,  American  industry  is  better  stim- 
ulated, and  American  wealth  more  rapidly  increased. 

In  connection  with  this  view,  it  is  a  curiots  fact,  in  the  recorded 
statistics  of  our  foreign  commerce,  that  both  our  tonnage  and  freights 
have  augmented  fastest  under  falling  duties  and  the  largest  portion  of 
free  imports,  and  that  both  have  swollen  quickest  with  those  nations 
that  supplied  us  chiefly  with  such  imports. 

Nor  is  such  a  course  of  business  unfavorable  to  independence  and 
peace,  as  well  as  prosperity.  On  the  contrary,  it  removes  one  tempta- 
tion to  aggressions  and  wars,  by  opening  access  for  all,  quietly,  to  the 
mutual  products  and  excellences  of  each.  It  also  furnishes  necessa- 
ries and  comforts  to  each  from  the  rest,  which  hostilities  would  endan- 
ger, if  not  destroy ;  and  thus  it  makes  the  free  interchange  of  them  a 
pledge,  a  guaranty,  and  bond  of  peace.  As  to  national  independence, 
I  go  as  far  as  the  farthest.  The  plausible  argument  against  the  free- 
trade  system,  that  it  makes  nations,  in  some  degree,  dependent  on  each 
other,  seems  to  overlook  or  confound  the  distinction  between  political 
as  well  as  pecuniary  independence,  so  very  desirable,  and  that  social 
independence  of  all  others,  which  is  not  so  very  desirable,  as  it  cannot 


526  GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE. 

exist  in  much  perfection,  except  with  the  hermit  in  his  cell,  or  the  sol- 
itary savage  in  the  desert.  Enlightened,  civilized,  social  man,  can 
hardly  be  expected  to  imitate  the  oyster  in  the  mud,  or  the  grub  folded 
in  his  vegetable  blanket  for  the  winter, — both,  for  a  time,  at  least,  inde- 
pendent of  the  rest  of  the  world ;  but  it  becomes  his  susceptible  nature 
to  draw  comforts  and  happiness  from  all  around  him,  and  derive  from 
society  all  the  reciprocal  advantages  for  which  society  itself  is  organ- 
ized. And  each  nation,  belonging,  in  a  like  manner,  to  the  great  family 
of  nations,  should  cheerfully  impart,  as  well  as  use,  all  those  benefits 
which  may  promote  the  good  of  the  whole. 

Failing  in  argument,  our  opponents  sometimes  appeal  to  precedent, 
or  usage,  in  favor  of  high  restrictive  systems.  But  precedent  may  be 
cited  for  almost  every  error,  delusion,  and  even  crime.  We  must  dis- 
criminate between  different  places  and  eras.  Many  principles  might 
be  avowed  and  practised  on  in  Egypt,  or  the  Celestial  Empire,  or  the 
Eeegee  Islands,  which  could  hardly  be  urged  as  a  fit  example  for  imi- 
tation in  an  enlightened  republic  in  the  nineteenth  century.  This  is 
no  theatre  for  repeating  such  inconsistencies  as  to  increase  taxes,  in 
order  to  relieve  an  embarrassed  community !  To  shut  up  some  of  our 
existing  markets,  when  prices  are  already  ruinously  low !  To  assist  a 
depressed  navigation  to  compete  with  other  nations,  by  taxing  it  higher ! 
To  promote  harmony  and  cooperation  in  society,  by  introducing  dis- 
criminations !  In  an  age  boastful  as  one  of  progress,  and  in  a  country 
proud  as  among  the  most  advancing,  and  under  rulers  pledged  to  aus- 
picious reforms,  and  amidst  taunts  against  other  nations  as  illiberal, 
intolerant,  and  monopolizing,  is  it  decent  or  decorous  to  summon  us  to 
assist  in  measures  like  these, —  measures,  likewise,  so  subversive  of  all 
those  great  principles  of  free  trade,  of  which,  heretofore,  as  a  nation, 
we  have  held  ourselves  to  be  the  champion  1  It  is  difficult  to  charac- 
terize such  steps,  however  well  meant,  in  plain  and  truthful  language, 
without  making  it  offensive.  I  forbear,  therefore,  saying  more  of  them 
in  this  view  of  the  subject,  except  to  quote  another  precedent  of  the 
high  protective  system,  which  stares  us  in  the  face  as  a  signal  failure, 
and  from  a  quarter  once  highly  distinguished.  It  is  the  case  of  Spain; 
and  it  is  the  more  striking,  as  her  natural  advantages  for  commerce 
were  so  very  conspicuous.  She  had  some  of  the  finest  harbors  in  the 
world.  Her  borders  were  washed  by  two  oceans.  Her  colonies  inhab- 
ited almost  every  latitude,  from  the  equator  to  the  poles.  Yet,  resort- 
ing most  unadvisedly  to  prohibitory  laws,  and  madly  persisting  in  their 
severities,  have  contributed  largely  to  sink  her  to  a  third-rate  power ;  — 
have,  in  brief,  reduced  her  population  one-half;  caused  the  grass  to 
grow  over  the  streets  of  her  great  commercial  marts ;  robbed  her  of 
some  of  the  richest  countries  the  sun  ever  shone  on  in  his  whole 
career ;  filled  up  her  sea-ports  with  rubbish  and  decaying  wharves ; 
rotted  her  navies ;  lined  her  borders  with  armies  of  brigand  smugglers ; 
and  ruined  most  of  her  vast  internal  trade,  and,  in  the  end,  her  man- 
ufactures themselves,  almost  as  effectually  as  her  foreign  commerce. 


GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE.  527 

The  only  striking  exception  to  all  this,  in  her  possessions,  is  Cuba,  and 
that  is  still  illustrative  of  the  same  principles,  by  being  indebted,  for 
its  great  prosperity  and  exports,  to  the  opposite  policy  of  lower  duties 
and  freer  ingress  and  egress  to  all  nations,  instead  of  the  exclusion  of 
all,  formerly  indulged  in  by  Spain.* 

And  for  what  are  we  invited  to  become  retrograde  in  our  commercial 
policy,  and  incur  all  such  dangers  and  sacrifices  ?  Merely  to  push 
further  experiments  already  fatal.  In  short,  merely  to  try,  at  the 
expense  of  other  interests,  to  manufacture  a  few  more  yards  of  calico 
here,  rather  than  buy  them  lower  elsewhere ;  or  to  make  a  few  more 
pounds  of  sugar  in  Louisiana,  rather  than  purchase  it  from  Cuba  or 
Brazil,  where  the  cane  ripens  two-thirds  larger,  and  the  sugar  is 
cheaper  in  proportion,  and  where  wre  can  get  it  in  exchange  for  our 
lumber  and  flour,  sold  at  much  higher  prices  than  here. 

To  dwell  on  these  considerations  no  longer,  it  is  manifest  that  such 
a  system  of  taxation  is  as  much  at  war  with  common  sense  and  com- 
mon economy  as  it  is  with  free  trade  ;  while  it  abandons  all  constitu- 
tional adherence  to  that  system  of  equal  legislation,  equal  rights,  and 
equal  protection,  so  indispensable  to  the  prosperity  of  the  whole,  and 
to  the  preservation  of  the  essence,  as  well  as  form,  of  a  republican 
government. 

Besides  such  local  views,  there  are  some  general  ones,  connected 
with  the  principles  of  free  trade,  which  deserve  special  notice,  as  they 
bear  on  the  progress  of  civilization',  on  the  better  security  of  human 
rights,  and  the  improvement  of  both  morals  and  intelligence.  The 
system,  fully  carried  out,  is  a  harbinger  and  guaranty  of  all  these.  It 
is  not,  like  other  systems,  tainted  with  exclusiveness.  It  does  not,  like 
them,  claim  a  sort  of  Divine  right  for  some  pursuits,  and  impute  a 
want  of  it  to  others ;  is  not,  like  them,  partial,  and,  so  far,  unjust  ; 
and  not,  like  them,  officious,  and  intermeddling  with  private  business 
and  tastes,  so  as  to  govern  too  much,  and  confide  too  much  in  the  wis- 
dom of  rulers,  rather  than  in  the  people  at  large.  By  pushing  the 
principles  of  free  trade  everywhere  and  into  everything,  each  country 
will  gradually  participate  more  in  the  advantages  of  all,  and  the 
imperfections  of  most  of  them  will  stand  a  better  chance  to  be  reme- 
died. Facilities  will  thus  be  afforded,  rather  than  creating  interrup- 
tions ;  improvements  be  attempted,  rather  than  obstacles ;  and  securi- 
ties provided  for  all  interests,  rather  than  neglect  or  oppression  indulged 
in  as  to  a  part.  There  will  then  be  a  growing  disposition  to  propagate 
widely  all  benefits,  instead  of  trying  to  monopolize  them  ;  and  nations 
possessing  advantages,  whether  in  arts,  arms  or  science,  will  permit 
them  to  be  diffused  wider,  and  thus  the  whole  become  more  civilized, 
rather  than  a  portion  be  kept  in  darkness  and  subjugation.  In  this 
way,  most  modern  advances  in  machinery,  as  well  as  valuable  inven- 
tions of  all  kinds,  not  only  enrich  and  strengthen  first  those  who  make 

*  See  Merchant's  Magazine. 


528  GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE. 

them,  but  are  spreading  quicker  and  wider ;  and  will,  ere  long,  cheapen 
consumption  as  well  as  production  everywhere,  and,  in  time,  fully  per- 
vade every  people  fitted  by  situation,  education  and  habits,  to  improve 
by  them. 

It  is  always  a  narrow  view  of  commercial,  as  well  as  moral  policy, 
to  seek  profit  to  ourselves  by  beggaring  others.  Nothing  is  gained 
durably  by  over-taxing  or  over-reaching  others.  On  the  contrary,  the 
wealth  of  all  nations  is  promoted  by  the  prosperity  of  all ;  and  the 
great  social  principle,  as  well  as  sound  political  wisdom,  requires  us  to 
be  humane  and  just  to  all,  liberal  to  all,  and  to  confer  benefits  on  all, 
rather  than  seek  undue  advantages.  If  less  wealth  were  attendant  on 
such  a  course  of  free  trade,  which  is  not  the  case  generally,  there 
would  be  more  liberty,  and  hence  more  satisfaction.  Only  a  crust 
and  liberty,  are  often  preferred  to  splendid  bondage.  Mankind  are 
willing,  when  intelligent,  to  possess  less  property,  if  they  can,  at  the 
same  time,  enjoy  greater  freedom, — freedom  in  action,  as  well  as  opin- 
ion,—  extending,  of  course,  to  both  government  and  conscience ;  and 
even  these  are  no  more  gratifying  than  freedom  in  employment  and 
business,  in  pleasure  and  locomotion  of  all  kinds.  We  sigh  often  to 
have,  as  did  our  great  progenitor,  the  whole  earth  before  us  where  to 
choose,  and  Providence  our  guide.  Any  climate  or  soil,  any  profes- 
sion or  employment,  will,  as  it  should,  thus  become  open  to  the  enter- 
prising. They  can  select  where  to  dwell,  where  to  trade,  or  to  visit, 
or  labor,  as  inclination  or  judgment  may  prompt ;  and  besides  being,  in 
this  kind  of  free  intercourse,  enabled  to  buy  where  cheapest  and  sell 
where  dearest,  the  fancy  and  health  can  be  pursued,  and  happiness  in 
all  ways  be  promoted.  Were  it  otherwise,  our  nature  revolts  at 
restraint.  We  object  to  have  even  wealth  forced  upon  us.  We  would 
fain  do  nothing  by  compulsion ;  like  Falstaff,  not  even  give  reasons  in 
that  way.  People  are  willing  to  be  taxed  higher,  if  they  are  allowed 
a  free  voice  in  imposing  and  expending  the  revenue  so  as  to  insure 
more  equality.  But  the  consequence  of  such  a  free  voice  is  to  stimu- 
late industry,  enterprise  and  trade,  and  gradually  to  lessen  those  bur- 
dens which  would  otherwise  increase,  and  which,  unchecked,  tend  to 
break  down  society,  by  impoverishing  all  who  produce  and  pay,  and 
driving  them,  in  the  end,  to  repudiation,  insurrection,  or  revolution. 
But  it  is  not  the  truth  that  light  taxes,  and  less  restraint  on  all  kinds 
of  industry  and  trade,  ever  lead  to  a  permanent  diminution  of  wealth 
in  any  country,  however  unfavored,  in  appearance,  by  either  nature  or 
art.  On  the  contrary,  the  very  Alps  themselves  have  become  fertile 
under  liberal  institutions ;  and  the  Swiss  inhabitants  of  their  slopes  and 
valleys  have  become  well-fed,  well-clothed,  intelligent,  and,  above  all, 
most  successful  in  manufactures  themselves,  without  high  or  protecting 
duties.  Industry,  climate,  skill,  coupled  with  liberty,  have  made 
them  outstrip  those  who  were  most  powerful  and  wealthy  when  they 
started  in  the  contest.  And  is  it  possible  that  we  need  monopolies 
and  oppression  to  enable  us  to  compete  with  any  country  in  raising 


GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE.  529 

cotton  at  the  south,  or  wheat  in  the  west,  or  corn  in  the  Middle  States, 
or  hay  in  the  east  ?  Nay,  do  even  the  ship-builders  of  the  east  ask  any 
discriminating  duties  on  tonnage,  if  you  will  only  exempt  them  and 
the  articles  they  consume  from  high  and  discriminating  taxes  ?  Far, 
far  from  it,  if,  at  the  same  time,  you  throw  open  all  the  proper  ave- 
nues for  employment  to  their  navigation.  Among  other  aids,  a  free 
trade  with  foreign  countries  on  our  borders,  by  land,  should  be  fully 
encouraged.  Why  should  not  such  a  trade  be  permitted  by  land,  as 
well  as  sea,  when  it  can  be  well  protected  against  frauds  on  the  reve- 
nue ?  It  is  a  most  vicious  policy  to  prohibit  this  trade  in  reexporting 
foreign  articles,  except  at  the  loss  of  the  whole  imposts  on  them.  We 
thus  not  only  deprive  our  own  vessels  of  much  employment,  in  bring- 
ing merchandise  here  from  abroad  for  this  trade,  but  rob  our  own 
canals,  railroads,  boats,  and  carriers  of  all  kinds,  of  large  gains  from 
the  interior  transportation  of  it  to  the  extensive  foreign  possessions  — 
Texian,  Mexican,  and  British  —  on  our  vast  inland  frontier.  We  for- 
get the  more  wise  policy,  in  this  respect,  even  of  France,  Holland,  and 
Northern  Germany. 

Under  a  like  spirit,  the  most  liberal  rules  of  warehousing  should  be 
adopted.  They  would  give  additional  activity  to  our  vessels  and  com- 
mercial enterprise,  prevent  the  loss  of  interest  on  cash  duties  till 
articles  are  reexported,  and  relieve  all  from  troublesome,  as  well  as 
useless,  payments  and  repayments  on  articles  never  intended  for  con- 
sumption here.  Without  such  rules,  our  country  is  obstructed  in 
becoming  the  great  commercial  depot  for  the  whole  American  conti- 
nent, as  well  as  the  West  Indies ;  and  even  our  manufacturers  are 
frequently  deprived  of  an  opportunity  to  make  sales,  as  would  then  be 
done,  to  foreign  merchants  resorting  here  for  assorted  cargoes  to 
supply  the  growing  demands  of  the  Spanish,  British,  French,  or 
Indian  races,  covering  yearly,  as  the  former  do  more  and  more,  the 
hills,  prairies  and  savannas,  of  this  new  world.  What  Tyre  or  Venice, 
Alexandria  or  Antwerp,  once  were,  and  London  now  is,  to  the  shores 
of  the  Mediterranean  and  Europe,  it  is  clear  that,  in  this  way,  Boston, 
New  York,  and  New  Orleans  might,  ere  long,  become  to  regions 
larger,  if  not  richer,  that  fill  the  vast  spaces  between  the  Atlantic  and 
the  Pacific. 

To  discourage  such  an  enlarged  intercourse,  profitable  even  to  man- 
ufactures, as  well  as  agriculture  and  commerce,  is  short-sighted,  and  is 
a  relic,  in  policy,  of  systems  and  theories  unworthy  the  present  age. 
No  matter  whether  this  intercourse  between  different  nations,  or  dif- 
ferent portions  of  one  nation,  be  carried  on  by  caravans,  ships  of  the 
desert,  through  the  heart  of  Asia  and  the  sands  of  Africa,  or  by  lakes 
and  rivers,  watering  half  a  continent,  or  by  sea,  doubling  the  stormiest 
capes  and  penetrating  remotest  islands, —  still  let  it  be  free  —  still  let 
it  be  untaxed,  unfettered.  It  will  then  shower  down  innumerable 
benefits,  not  only  in  its  progress  by  the  way-side,  but  benefit  all,  both 
producers  and  consumers.  Again,  it  is  of  no  consequence,  in  one 
45 


530  GENERAL   PRINCIPLES   OF   FREE   TRADE. 

view,  whether  those  articles  are  iron  for  the  plough,  or  ostrich-feathers 
for  the  ball-room ;  the  olive  for  peace,  or  arms  for  war ;  drugs  for 
health,  or  gold  for  ornament ;  woollens  and  cottons  for  the  poor,  or 
silks  and  cashmeres  for  the  rich ;  or  sugar  and  salt  for  all  classes,  and 
the  last  for  the  whole  animal  creation ;  still  liberality  in  the  trade 
blesses,  like  mercy,  twice — both  him  that  gives  and  him  that  takes. 
On  the  one  side,  that  is  parted  with  which  is  not  wanted,  or  can  with- 
out suffering  be  spared;  and,  on  the  other,  that  is  obtained  which 
is  needed  either  to  supply  real  wants,  minister  to  our  comforts,  or 
gratify  taste.  Both  are  accommodated,  or  both  enriched;  and  the 
industry  is  stimulated,  and  the  faculties  sharpened,  in  search  of  more 
of  that  which  either  promotes  pleasure,  or  advances  knowledge,  or 
increases  power.  In  fine,  it  is  the  theory  which  tends  best,  in  all 
countries,  to  develop  the  national  mind,  as  well  as  the  national  wealth. 
It  gives  full  and  free  play  to  all  the  faculties  and  instincts  of  man, 
while  it  is  content  to  take  from  the  earth  the  gifts  of  Providence, 
where  they  are  natural  and  most  profuse.  It  does  not  attempt  to  cul- 
tivate drugs  in  Greenland,  or  tea  and  coffee  in  New  England,  or  pine- 
apples in  Canada.  And  should  the  Hindoos  strive  to  freeze  their  own 
ice  by  a  chemical  process,  or  the  inhabitants  of  New  Orleans  labor  to 
make  their  own  stone  artificially,  or  the  Yankees  endeavor  to  grow, 
for  their  general  consumption,  pepper  and  palm-oil,  they  would  only 
illustrate,  in  a  different  form,  some  of  the  follies  and  losses  which 
attend  most  of  the  departures  from  the  free-trade  principle. 

The  moral  and  intellectual  view  of  the  subject  is  stronger  than  even 
the  physical  or  the  commercial  one.  It  is  a  question  going  far  beyond 
the  ledger,  —  beyond  dollars  and  cents,  —  the  number  of  bushels, 
pounds,  gallons,  or  yards  produced,  and  the  value  of  exports  and 
imports,  as  well  as  amount  of  tonnage.  It  concerns  natural  fitness, 
social  improvement,  morals,  and  the  higher  education  and  civilization, 
as  well  as  happiness,  of  millions  on  millions  of  immortal  beings.  That 
is  a  circle  wider  than  all  others,  reaching  the  future,  no  less  than  the 
present  welfare,  of  most  of  the  human  race. 

Intolerance  in  religion  has  been  one  of  the  allies  of  restrictions  in 
trade.  It  is  bred  in  the  same  prescriptive  school,  and  has  sometimes 
injured  even  its  coadjutors.  It  helped  to  expel  the  Lutheran 
mechanics  from  Spain,  and  drive  across  the  Mediterranean  her  best 
Moorish  manufacturers.  By  the  repeal  of  the  edict  of  Nantes,  it  long 
retarded  the  prosperity  of  France;  and,  by  a  like  exclusive  spirit, 
peopled  originally  several  of  our  own  States  from  the  persecuting 
shores  of  England.  Even  at  this  day,  by  the  union  of  church  and 
State  in  the  latter,  thus  doubling  ecclesiastical  taxes  on  seceders,  and 
by  high  corn-law  duties,  so  oppressive  to  labor,  it  violates  some  of  the 
most  salutary  of  the  free-trade  principles.  A  mass  of  human  suffer- 
ing has  thus  been  produced  there,  of  late  years,  which  is  ill  atoned  for 
by  all  her  greatness  and  glories.  Though  palaces  rise  in  the  streets 
of  Manchester,  and  fertility  clothes  the  fields  of  contiguous  counties 


GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE.  531 

with  golden  sheaves,  yet  the  laborer  often  starves  in  sight  of  them,  or 
lingers  out  a  miserable  existence  in  some  neighboring  almshouse. 
What  matters  it  to  him  if  the  treasuries  of  China  are  captured,  and 
conquering  armies  are  pushed  over  the  snows  of  Afghanistan,  and 
heroic  columns  rise  in  London  to  commemorate  national  glory,  if  he 
and  his  children  suffer  for  bread,  or  freeze  from  half-nakedness,  or  are 
robbed  of  political  suffrage,  and  have  their  morals  and  intellects 
debased  by  brutal  ignorance?*  Under  a  like  view,  as  to  the  effects  of 
such  a  system  on  mind,  morals,  and  progress,  while  high  protection  is 
yielded  here  to  manufactures,  it  must  be  remembered  that  it  is  at  the 
expense  of  agriculture  and  commerce,  and  is  confined  in  its  influences 
to  the  owner  of  the  establishment,  or  the  capitalist, — to  property  alone, 
or  dead  matter,  rather  than  extended  to  the  artisan  or  laborer,  the 
spirit,  heart,  and  soul  engaged.  In  the  most  manufacturing  State  of 
the  Union,  the  mere  operative  is  stripped  of  all  political  rights,  and 
deprived  of  that  free  suffrage,  in  forming  and  regulating  government, 
which  constitutes  the  great  distinction  between  liberty  and  slavery. 
On  the  contrary,  the  free-trade  principle  spreads  a  table  for  industry 
and  virtue  in  every  climate.  Under  its  operation,  man  is  so  consti- 
tuted, and  is  the  only  known  being  in  creation  thus  blessed,  that  he 
can  succeed  in  living  under  the  frosts  of  the  pole,  as  well  as  the  heats 
of  the  equator ;  and  can  and  will,  if  let  alone,  thrive  and  improve  by 
all  kinds  of  employment.  Under  it,  no  surplus  of  anything  useful 
exists  which  is  lost,  as  nothing  abounds  in  any  country  needed  else- 
where, without  finding  a  market.  Such  intercourse  stimulates 
industry,  and  rewards  enterprise.  It  diffuses,  also,  arts,  as  well  as 
letters ;  and  the  whole  world  thus  gradually  becomes  improving  and 
useful  to  the  whole.  We  know  how,  from  acorns  and  roots,  man  has 
advanced  in  food  to  grain  and  meats  ;  from  skins  for  clothing,  to  the 
most  beautiful  fabrics  of  silk  and  wool ;  and  from  ignorance  and  the 
chase,  to  learning  and  all  the  glories  of  civilization.  This  has  always 
been  witnessed  most  rapidly  where  commerce  has  most  abounded  and 
was  freest.  Thus,  in  the  dawn  of  time,  it  gradually  circled,  and  thus 
civilized  all  the  shores  of  the  Mediterranean.  It  then  passed  the  pil- 
lars of  Hercules,  and  penetrated  the  forests  of  what  were  savage 
Britain  and  savage  Germany ;  crossed  the  Atlantic  afterward,  to  a 
little  less  savage  people,  covering  the  whole  western  continent ; 
explores  still  further  to  the  remotest  isles ;  and  is  now  at  such  a 
height,  and  surrounded  with  such  improvements  in  arts,  laws,  and 
literature,  as  to  reflect  back,  from  the  once  Gothic  portions  of  Europe 
and  from  barbarian  America,  increased  light  and  knowledge.  Whither? 
you  may  ask.  Even  to  the  seven  hills  of  Rome,  the  banks  of  the 
Tiber,  as  well  as  the  Ilissus  and  the  Nile.  It  is  a  curious  fact,  illus- 
trating the  mutual  action  and  reaction  through  commercial  intercourse, 
that  this  very  year,  in  the  city  of  New  York,  has  been  formed  a 
society  to  diffuse  useful  and   religious  knowledge  in  Italy.     This, 

*  See  Lester. 


532  GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE. 

among  us,  a  people  whose  English  ancestors,  thirteen  centuries  ago, 
were  painted  savages,  carried  into  slavery  to  Italy  —  and  this  in  a 
country  five  centuries  ago  utterly  unknown  to  Italy,  and  full  of 
forests  and  Vandal  Indians  !  How  irresistibly  do  such  facts  carry  our 
memories  back  to  the  conquest  and  civilization  of  Palestine,  from  more 
commercial  Egypt,  and  transport  our  imaginations  forward  to  a  period, 
not  far  distant,  when  commerce  may  carry  home  most  of  the  exiles 
from  Africa  educated,  and  fitted  to  civilize  her  vast  waste  places,  and 
reform  her  debased  servitude  !  The  tenants  of  those  arid  regions, 
reached  but  seldom  by  foreign  commerce,  continue,  like  the  Esqui- 
maux, almost  as  barbarous  as  when  first  discovered ;  and,  like  most 
communities  shut  up  from  the  liberalizing  influences  of  free  trade,  have 
improved  little  more  than  the  ox  since  the  days  of  Job,  or  the  swine 
since  the  miracle  of  our  Saviour. 

In  fine,  without  the  vivifying  impulses  of  that  trade  on  man,  the 
world  is  stationary  or  retrograde ;  while,  with  them,  all  is  progress,  as 
well  as  an  apparent  development  of  some  useful  end  in  the  contrivance 
of  the  human  race ;  and  if  any  one  nation  or  tongue  is  destined  to 
pervade  the  globe  otherwise  than  by  arms,  and  to  ameliorate  its  condi- 
tion, through  the  arts  of  peace,  letters,  and  religion,  it  must  be  that 
one  most  influenced  in  all  things  by  the  spirit  of  free  commerce.  That, 
alone,  can  surmount  every  obstacle,  penetrate  remotest  regions,  win 
confidence  by  political  favors,  and,  through  its  comforts  and  neces- 
saries, if  not  luxuries,  interest,  excite,  benefit,  and  elevate,  every 
people.  Withdraw,  too,  or  shackle  its  power,  after  once  enjoyed  as 
here,  and  though  it  may  seem,  at  first,  to  affect  only  the  humble  ship- 
wright, the  sailor,  or  the  merchant,  and  the  axe  and  the  saw  may  only 
appear  to  stand  still,  the  wharf  and  the  warehouse  only  at  first  to 
decay,  rather  than  the  splendid  abodes  of  wealth  and  the  gorgeous 
temple,  yet,  rely  upon  it,  there  is  a  canker  preying, —  a  worm  gnaw- 
ing at  the  root  of  the  prosperity  of  the  whole, — a  mildew  begun,  which 
will,  in  time,  blast  every  ramification  of  society. 

Miserable,  indeed,  beyond  any  description,  must  be  the  condition 
of  any  country,  where,  by  a  violation  of  these  principles  of  free  trade, 
the  masses  must  deteriorate  rather  than  improve,  and  wages  become 
lower,  and  the  clothing  or  food  of  the  millions  are  highly  taxed  to 
supply  the  extravagances  and  follies  of  the  few ;  and,  what  is  even 
worse  than  this,  the  intellects  of  the  former  are  left  neglected,  and 
their  morals  depraved. 

But  it  is  time  to  close  this  hasty  address.  The  free-trade  system, 
as  thus  explained,  is,  in  my  view,  the  only  one  suited  to  a  free  people 
or  a  free  government.  If  it  cannot  be  restored  and  perpetuated  here, 
my  deliberate  conviction,  without  any  want  of  candor  or  charity  as  to 
the  designs  of  our  opponents,  is,  that  our  boasted  form  of  government, 
and  all  its  golden  promises  to  mankind,  must  in  the  end  prove  a 
mockery.  If  it  does  not  soon  triumph  again  in  all  its  essentials,  we  shall 
lose  consistency  of  character  over  the  globe,  and  it  is  vain  to  look  for 


GENERAL  PRINCIPLES  OF  FREE  TRADE.  533 

restoration  of  permanent  prosperity,  or  to  cherish  brilliant  hopes  for 
the  future ;  and  the  experiment  of  a  just  and  equal  self-government  in 
this  part  of  the  western  hemisphere,  as  a  model  for  the  world  now  and 
forever,  must  be  considered  to  have  failed.  If  this  be  not  the  truth, 
let  others  exhibit  it ;  for  truth  should  be  the  object  of  all.  In  the 
mean  time,  I  trust  that,  knowing  these  principles,  —  to  use  the  words 
adopted  as  your  beautiful  motto,  —  "  You  shall  know  the  truth,  and 
the  truth  shall  make  you  free." 

Though  my  remarks  have  been  addressed  to  all  classes,  —  all  being 
deeply  interested  in  the  success  of  such  principles, — yet,  before  closing, 
allow  me  to  repeat  the  exhortation  of  the  philanthropic  Channing,  on 
this  topic,  to  the  merchants  in  particular.  It  was  given  not  long  pre- 
vious to  his  death,  and  some  may  respect  it  the  more  from  an  impres- 
sion that  it  may  have  been  influenced  less  by  any  party  prejudice  than 
my  own  views.  This  was  his  language:  "Allow  me  to  say  a  word 
to  the  merchants  of  our  country  on  another  subject.  The  time  is 
come  when  they  are  particularly  called  to  take  yet  more  generous 
views  of  their  vocation,  and  to  give  commerce  a  universality  as 
yet  unknown.  I  refer  to  the  juster  principles  which  are  gaining 
ground  on  the  subject  of  free  trade,  and  to  the  growing  disposition 
of  nations  to  promote  it.  Free  trade  !  this  is  the  plain  duty  and  plain 
interest  of  the  human  race.  To  level  all  barriers  to  free  exchange ; 
to  cut  up  the  system  of  restriction,  root  and  branch ;  to  open  every 
port  on  earth  to  every  product ;  —  this  is  the  office  of  enlightened 
humanity.  To  this  a  free  nation  should  especially  pledge  itself. 
Freedom  of  the  seas ;  freedom  of  harbors ;  an  intercourse  of  nations, 
free  as  the  winds :  —  this  is  not  a  dream  of  philanthropists.  We  are 
tending  towards  it,  and  let  us  hasten  it.  Under  a  wiser  and  more 
Christian  civilization,  we  shall  look  back  on  our  present  restrictions  as 
we  do  on  the  swaddling-bands  by  which,  in  darker  times,  the  human 
body  was  compressed." 


THE   UNION   AND   THE   FUGITIVE   SLAVE   LAW. 


THE  UNION  AND   THE  FUGITIVE   SLAVE  LAW/ 


Concord,  N.  H.,  Nov.  15, 1850. 

Gentlemen  :  —  Your  polite  invitation  for  me  to  attend  a  Union 
meeting,  at  Manchester,  on  the  20th  instant,  has  been  received. 

The  great  object  of  that  meeting  —  "to  advise  upon  the  course  best 
calculated  to  allay  all  unnecessary  further  agitation"  of  certain  sec- 
tional questions  —  meets  with  my  hearty  concurrence. 

Without  more  forbearance  as  to  such  agitation  among  the  sister 
States,  it  is  my  solemn  conviction  that  the  present  hallowed  Union  of 
those  States  will  be  placed  in  fearful  jeopardy. 

It  is  another  alarming  sign  of  the  times,  that  any  portion  of  our  law- 
abiding  community  should  either  recommend  forcible  resistance  to  the 
laws,  or  actually  participate  in  measures  designed  to  overawe  the  con- 
stituted authorities,  and  defeat  the  execution  of  legal  precepts  issued 
by  those  authorities. 

This  is  in  direct  hostility  to  the  injunctions  of  Washington,  in  his 
farewell  address  to  his  grateful  countrymen.  And  it  seems  no  less 
hostile  and  derogatory  to  every  sound  principle  for  sustaining  public 
order,  and  obedience  to  what  the  legislative  agents  of  the  people  and 
the  States  have  enacted. 

The  only  objection  to  such  obedience  which  has  come  to  my  knowl- 
edge, and  which  seems  supported  by  any  semblance  of  argument,  is 
one  very  dangerous  for  individuals  to  rely  on  at  any  time  so  as  to  use 
force.  But  it  is  much  more  hazardous  when  the  measure  resisted  is 
one  sanctioned,  after  much  deliberation,  by  Congress  and  the  Presi- 
dent; one  provided  for  explicitly  in  the  constitution  itself;  one 
carried  into  effect,  except  as  to  some  details  since  added,  under  the 
father  of  his  country,  as  early  as  1793 ;  and  one  which  has  received 
the  approval  of  the  Supreme  Court,  sitting  as  the  highest  judicial 
tribunal  of  the  Union,  and  of  the  elevated  law-officer  of  the  government, 
the  present  Attorney  General  of  the  United  States. 

It  would  afford  me  much  pleasure  to  attend  your  meeting,  and 
express  my  views  at  length  on  this  subject,  were  it  not  that  this  last 
question  is  likely  to  come  before  me  officially,  one  warrant  having  thus 
been  issued  already  by  the  Circuit  Court,  of  which  I  am  a  member. 
Consequently,  I  do  not  deem  it  appropriate  to  offer  my  own  opinion  on 
it  now,  or  at  any  public  meeting,  until  the  parties  who  may  raise  it 
before  me  judicially  have  been  fully  heard. 

But,  at  all  times  and  in  all  places,  I  shall  never  hesitate  to  raise 
my  voice  against  forcible  resistance  to  established  laws,  made  by  our 

*  A  letter  in  reply  to  an  invitation  from  B.  F.  Ayer,  Esq.,  and  others,  to  attend  a 
Union  meeting  in  Manchester,  N.  H.,  Nov.  1850. 


ADDRESS   TO   LAFAYETTE.  535 

own  agents,  and  subject  to  be  altered  by  majorities,  peaceably,  when- 
ever obnoxious.  And,  in  point  of  conscience  and  common  sense,  it 
must  be  as  culpable  to  thwart  their  execution,  or  impair  the  Union,  by 
covert  and  indirect  means,  as  by  open  violence.         Respectfully, 

LEVI  WOODBURY. 

B.  F.  Ayer,  I      Committee 

Abr.  Robertson,  >  of 

Amos  Hadley,  and  others,  )  Arrangements. 


AN  ADDRESS,  AT  BOSTON,  TO  LAFAYETTE,  ON  THE  OC- 
CASION OF  HIS  VISITING  PORTSMOUTH,  N.  H.,  1824. 


A  committee  from  the  town  of  Portsmouth,  in  the  State  of  New 
Hampshire,  consisting  of  Messrs.  Woodbury,  Upham,  Ladd,  and  Wen- 
dell, having  been  introduced  to  General  Lafayette,  at  Boston,  August 
24th,  1824,  the  chairman  remarked : 

General  :  —  We  appear  before  you  as  a  delegation  from  the  town 
of  Portsmouth, —  a  town  which,  after  the  great  crisis  of  our  Revolu- 
tion, had  the  pleasure  to  welcome  you  as  one  of  her  deliverers  from 
foreign  oppression. 

Time  has  since  robbed  her  of  her  Langdons,  her  Whipples,  and, 
indeed,  most  of  those  cotemporaries  on  whose  memory  your  image  was 
deeply  impressed ;  but  their  children,  and  their  children's  children,  in 
common  with  the  whole  population  of  New  Hampshire,  still  associate 
your  name  and  virtues  with  those  of  the  founders  of  our  independence. 

The  citizens  of  Portsmouth  feel  anxious  to  welcome  you  again  to 
their  hearths  and  their  altars.  They  wish  to  mingle  their  sympathies 
with  the  prisoner  of  Olmutz,  and  to  cherish  as  their  guest  the  patriot 
who,  in  one  hemisphere,  without  fear  or  reproach,  shed  his  youthful 
blood  in  the  triumphs  of  liberty,  and,  in  another,  during  thirty  years 
of  persecution  and  disappointed  hopes,  never  faltered  in  fidelity  to  the 
sacred  rights  of  man. 

They  desire  to  show  you,  in  person,  a  few  of  the  improvements 
which,  in  less  than  half  a  century,  have  been  wrought  by  the  industry, 
enterprise,  and  intelligence,  attendant  on  those  liberal  principles  to 
whose  success  your  whole  life  has  been  devoted ;  and  are  solicitous,  by 


536  BIRTH-DAY   OF  JEFFERSON. 

the  part  they  seek:  to  take  in  your  reception  here,  to  give  some  faint 
evidence  of  their  own  attachment  to  those  principles,  and  of  their  warm 
gratitude  and  veneration  for  your  former  services  to  their  country. 

In  behalf  of  our  fellow-townsmen,  therefore,  suffer  us  to  repeat 
assurances  of  their  high  satisfaction  at  your  arrival  in  America,  and  to 
solicit  a  visit  soon  as  your  convenience  may  permit. 


BIRTH-DAY  OF  JEFFERSON.* 


Mr.  Woodbury  observed  that  the  kind  allusion  in  the  last  toast  to 
the  east,  and  the  wishes  of  the  president  of  the  day,  and  other  gentle- 
men near,  had  emboldened  him  to  trespass  a  few  minutes  on  the 
indulgence  of  the  company. 

The  sentiment  expressed  in  the  toast  in  favor  of  unity  of  action  in 
the  great  cause  of  good  government  among  republicans  of  the  Jefferso- 
nian  faith,  wherever  found,  met  with  his  most  hearty  approbation.  He 
presumed  that  it  would  also  meet  with  the  approbation  of  the  large 
mass  of  his  immediate  constituents  at  home,  and  of  their  brethren  of 
the  same  principle  throughout  the  whole  east.  But  he  would  not 
assume  either  to  pledge  or  commit  them  on  any  point,  nor  usurp  to 
represent  them  in  any  respect  beyond  what  his  duty  required  from  his 
peculiar  position.  On  account  of  that,  he  should  venture  to  express, 
on  all  proper  occasions,  his  own  belief  as  to  their  political  opinions,  and 
endeavor  to  vindicate  them  whenever  attacked.  But  beyond  this  he 
could  not  be  tempted  to  go ;  because  one  of  their  opinions  he  well  knew 
to  be  the  propriety  of  extreme  jealousy  of  men  in  power.  He  himself 
applauded  that  jealousy ;  he  deemed  it  a  cardinal  article  in  the  Jefferso- 
nian  faith  j  he  thought  its  constant  exercise  one  of  the  surest  preserva- 
tives of  our  liberties ;  and  woe  be  to  that  individual  in  authority  from 
the  east,  who,  as  a  public  man,  dares  ever  arrogate  what  has  not  been 
intrusted  to  him !  Notwithstanding  the  liberality  displayed  towards 
the  republicans  of  the  east  in  the  toast  just  read,  it  was  thought  to 
have  been  industriously  inculcated  in  some  quarters  that  our  prejudices, 
our  interests  and  opinions,  furnished  other  traits  in  our  character, 

*  A  speech  at  a  public  meeting,  in  Washington,  in  celebration  of  the  birth-day  of 
Thomas  Jefferson,  April  13,  1830. 


BIRTH-DAY   OF   JEFFERSON.  537 

peculiar  and  offensive  to  the  residue  of  the  Union.  Prejudices  we 
doubtless  possess,  or  we  should  cease  to  be  human ;  but,  be  assured,  no 
prejudices  to  the  injury  of  our  brethren  of  the  same  principle,  whether 
north,  south,  or  west.  Interests  we  have  sometimes  been  charged  with 
pursuing  which  are  exclusive,  and  prejudicial  to  other  quarters ;  and 
interests, —  great,  paramount  interests, —  we  doubtless  possess.  But, 
as  pursued  and  advocated  by  republicans  of  the  Jeffersonian  faith,  they 
are  as  admirably  formed  to  harmonize  with  the  interests  of  the  south, 
as,  in  the  language  of  Samuel  Dexter,  on  another  occasion,  are  formed 
for  harmony  and  union  the  two  sexes  of  the  human  race. 

Whatever  heretic  opinions  have  been  imputed  to  some  of  us, —  and 
strong  opinions  we  doubtless  possess  on  many  questions  of  political 
moment, —  yet  he  was  happy  to  avow,  before  this  assembly,  that,  among 
the  republicans  of  the  east,  those  opinions,  in  a  mass,  belonged  to  the 
Jeffersonian  faith.  That,  beside  this  test  of  the  correctness  of  their 
opinions,  they  were  in  a  habit  of  proving  their  faith  by  their  works ; 
and  usually  carried  their  opinions  into  votes  and  measures  according 
with  that  faith,  rather  than  confining  their  Jeffersonism  to  their  lips. 
He  would  ask,  why  should  not  the  east  go  heart  and  hand,  on  all  great 
occasions,  with  their  brethren  of  the  same  principle  elsewhere  ?  With- 
out entering  into  a  detail  too  tedious  for  this  occasion,  did  they  not 
encounter  like  perils  with  the  rest  in  the  early  settlement  of  the  coun- 
try, in  planting  the  wilderness,  in  driving  back  the  barbarian,  and  in 
patient  endurance  of  those  thousand  privations  and  ills  that  flesh  is 
heir  to,  in  new  and  inclement  regions  ?  Did  they  not  mingle  their 
blood  and  their  counsels  with  the  rest,  through  all  the  fiery  trials  of 
the  Revolution,  and  prove  themselves  right  good  swords-men,  as  well 
as  book-men  ?  Did  they  not  aid  in  the  formation  of  our  constitution  ?- 
And  have  they  not,  since,  manfully  struggled  to  uphold  it  1 

Soon  as  the  principles  in  its  administration  in  1798  and  1801 
became  fully  understood,  a  large  minority,  and  at  times  a  majority,  in 
the  east,  have,  with  fearlessness  and  constancy,  united  with  their 
brethren  in  the  south,  the  Middle  States,  and  the  west,  in  support  of 
that  class  of  principles  almost  canonized  by  the  great  statesman  whose 
birth  we  are  now  celebrating.  Many  of  them  have  gone  for  those 
principles,  not  on  the  popular  current,  buoyed  up  by  triumphant 
numbers,  and  the  smiles,  honors,  and  plaudits  of  the  times ;  but  through 
taunts,  reproaches,  rebuffs,  and  persecutions,  which  none  can  duly 
appreciate  who  have  not  felt  or  witnessed  them.  Through  scenes 
infinitely  more  disheartening  than  those  which  the  great  orator  of 
antiquity,  towards  the  close  of  his  pilgrimage  on  earth,  looking  back 
upon,  observed  that,  if  starting  afresh  in  life,  with  all  his  sufferings 
and  glories  presented  on  the  one  hand,  and  a  halter  on  the  other,  he 
should  be  inclined  to  accept  the  latter.  Could  that  martyr  in  defence 
of  Athenian  democracy  have  gazed  through  the  vista  of  futurity,  and 
seen  what  is  the  high  price  of  freedom  in  every  age, —  could  he  have 
beheld  how  often  such  sufferings  were  to  come  unmitigated  by  his 


538  BIRTH-DAY   OF   JEFFERSOX. 

glories,  and  how  indispensable  to  the  preservation  of  republican  liberty 
in  all  after  times  were  the  moral  courage  and  invincible  fortitude  which 
he  sometimes  failed  to  exhibit, —  he  might,  in  so  glorious  a  cause,  have 
rejoiced  to  devote  all  he  had,  or  ever  could  hope  to  have. 

Mr.  W.  asked  indulgence  a  moment  more,  and  he  was  done.  What 
had  been  the  fruits  of  those  principles  of  Mr.  Jefferson,  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  this  government,  to  support  which  so  much  at  the  east  and 
elsewhere  had  been  sacrificed  and  suffered?  They  are  beautifully 
grouped  in  an  address  to  him,  in  1809,  by  the  Legislature  of  Virginia, 
when  he  was  about  to  retire  from  public  life.  He  could  not  recollect 
them  accurately,  nor  call  to  mind  each  particular ;  but,  in  substance, 
the  Legislature  thanked  him  for  the  model  of  an  administration  con- 
ducted on  the  purest  principles  of  republicanism ;  for  pomp  and  state 
laid  aside;  for  internal  taxes  and  public  burthens  diminished;  for 
superfluous  officers  disbanded;  for  the  monarchical  maxim  that  a 
national  debt  is  a  national  blessing  renounced ;  for  more  than  thirty 
millions  of  our  debt  discharged ;  for  the  Indian  title  to  a  hundred  mil- 
lion acres  of  our  national  domain  extinguished ;  and,  finally,  for  what, 
above  all  other  themes,  the  historic  muse  would  hang  on  with  rapture, 
—  the  liberty  of  speech  and  of  the  press  had  been  preserved  inviolate, 
without  which  genius  and  science  are  given  to  man  in  vain.  The 
liberty  of  the  press  preserved  inviolate,  not  by  any  exclusion  of  its 
conductors  from  the  equal  rights  and  privileges  guaranteed  to  all,  but 
by  leaving  reason  free  to  combat  with  error,  and  due  honors  to  descend 
on  all  of  sterling  worth,  whether  in  or  out  of  employments  which  Bar- 
low and  Franklin  elevated  and  honored,  as  they  elevated  and  honored 
the  country  of  their  birth. 

The  argosy  of  State,  as  Mr.  Jefferson,  in  1801,  called  our  consti- 
tution, in  writing  to  the  revolutionary  veteran  Dickerson,  has  since 
his  administration  been  sometimes  steered  into  rather  rough  water, 
and  been  somewhat  endangered  by  breakers.  But,  under  a  new  com- 
mander and  disciple  of  Jefferson,  can  we  not  justly  cherish  the  hope 
that  she  will,  as  was  then  promised, —  that  she  will  again  be  put  on  her 
republican  tack,  will  escape  shipwreck,  and  long  show,  by  the  beauty 
of  her  motions,  the  skill  of  her  builders  and  officers  ? 

He  felt  assured  that  his  friends  in  the  east  were  ready  to  cooperate, 
in  the  language  of  the  toast  just  given,  in  this  great  cause.  They 
were  ready  to  go  for  measures  in  true  accordance  with  their  profes- 
sions. Their  principles  were  intended  for  practical  effect,  and  not  to 
evaporate  in  mere  holiday  talk,  not  worth  the  breath  that  utters  it, 
or  the  ink  that  writes  it  down.  In  their  just  expectations  he  believed 
they  would  not  be  disappointed.  These  remarks  he  had  not  made  for 
flattery  to  the  memory  of  Jefferson  departed,  or  to  the  character  of 
any  of  his  admirers  present.  Anybody  who  knew  him  or  his  con- 
stituents knew  we  would  not  flatter  Neptune  for  his  trident,  nor 
Jove  for  his  power  to  thunder.  But  they  knew,  likewise,  we  were 
willing  to  offer  a  just  homage  to  merit  at  all  times  and  in  all  places. 


BIRTH-DAY   OF   JEFFERSON.  539 

They  knew  that  under  any  lead  in  which  we  have  confidence,  political 
and  personal,  we  are  willing,  at  all  times,  to  unite  with  our  brethren 
of  the  south,  the  Middle  States,  and  the  west,  to  enforce  the  main 
articles  of  the  Jeffersonian  faith  in  the  administration  of  our  govern- 
ment. We  deem  it  the  only  granite  foundation  for  our  Union ;  and, 
though  differences  of  opinion  must  and  will  exist  on  some  subjects,  yet 
it  was  as  much  as  erring  humanity  permitted,  that  those  who  acted 
together  in  a  free  government  should  agree  in  essentials.  A  union 
with  our  brethren,  founded  on  these  principles  in  their  great  essen- 
tials, and  fairly  and  equally  carried  into  the  administration  of  this 
government,  he  would  always  advocate  in  behalf  of  his  friends  in  the 
east ;  and  would  vouch  for  them  that,  like  Hannibal  at  the  altar,  they 
were  ready  to  swear  to  abandon  that  Union — never — never — never! 


Mr.  Woodbury  afterwards  said : 

Considering  the  peculiar  character  of  this  festival,  he  hoped  the 
company  would  pardon  him  if  he  repeated  the  last  democratic  senti- 
ment Mr.  Jefferson  ever  sent  out  to  the  world.  It  was  contained  in  a 
reply,  only  ten  days  before  his  death,  to  an  invitation  here  to  the  cele- 
bration on  that  very  fourth  of  July  on  which  his  spirit  took  its  upward 
flight,  and  which  day  his  pen  and  his  patriotism  had  contributed  so 
much  to  immortalize.  Half  a  century  before,  a  like  sentiment,  on  the 
equality  of  mankind,  had  been  incorporated  by  his  own  hand  into  the 
Declaration  of  Independence ;  and  he  would  now  give  it  in  the  last 
impressive  words  of  the  great  author  of  that  declaration :  "  The  pal- 
pable truth  that  the  mass  of  mankind  has  not  been  born  with  saddles 
on  their  backs,  nor  a  favored  few  booted  and  spurred,  ready  to  ride 
them  legitimately,  by  the  grace  of  God." 


540  RETURN  FROM  WASHINGTON. 


RETURN  FROM  WASHINGTON.* 

My  Fellow-townsmen  and  Neighbors: 

You  will  hardly  need  any  assurance  that  I  feel  great  happiness  in 
meeting  you  again,  after  so  long  an  absence.  This  happiness  is 
increased  by  finding  that  health  and  prosperity  have  in  many  respects 
blessed  all  around  and  among  you.  However  strong  is  my  gratifica- 
tion at  this  on  your  account  alone,  it  may  be  mingled  with  some  con- 
siderations not  entirely  disinterested ;  as  my  intention  always  has  been 
to  spend  the  remainder  of  my  life  amidst  your  community,  and  to 
share  intimately  in  its  weal  or  woe,  till  our  spirits  ascend  to  the 
beneficent  source  of  all  we  have  had,  possess,  or  hope  for. 

If,  under  such  circumstances,  my  sensibilities  were  not  deeply 
excited  by  this  flattering  reception,  I  should  be  more  or  less  than 
human.  To  be  thus  welcomed  home  revives  the  remembrance  of 
many  favors  in  days  gone  by,  from  yourselves,  and  some  who,  I  regret, 
as  your  chairman  feelingly  remarked,  have  since  passed  away  and  live 
no  more  to  greet  me,  and  whose  departure,  like  that  which  has  just 
clothed  the  nation  in  mourning,  shows  what  shadows  we  are  and 
what  shadows  we  pursue. 

The  generation  succeeding  them  will  no  doubt  act  worthy  of  their 
sires  :  and  most  warmly  do  I  reciprocate  to  the  whole  of  you  all  your 
kind  wishes  and  heartfelt  congratulations. 

On  such  an  occasion  as  this,  I  would  not,  if  I  could,  check  the  over- 
flow of  friendly  feeling,  by  many  wTords.  But  you  will  pardon  me  for 
attempting  to  do  plain  justice,  in  a  few  particulars,  to  yourselves  and 
the  other  citizens  of  that  Spartan  State  which  gave  birth  to  most 
of  us. 

Amidst  the  scenes  of  high  responsibility  it  has  been  my  lot  to  pass 
through  since  our  separation,  and  which  you  have  been  pleased  to 
mention  in  so  complimentary  a  manner,  it  has  always  been  an  abiding 
consolation,  that  the  people  of  such  a  State,  who  knew  me  best,  have 
confided  in  me  most,  and  that  their  trust,  under  the  severest  assaults, 
has  never  faltered. 

Is  it  strange,  then,  that  my  heart  —  untravelled  —  should  con- 
stantly have  turned  to  these  Pilgrim  shores  ?  or  that  my  mind,  though 
beneath  new  skies  in  the  service  of  New  Hampshire  and  her  sister 
States,  should  have  remained  unchanged,  and  my  devotion  to  your 
democratic  principles  have  grown,  like  your  iron-bound  coast,  only 
firmer  by  repeated  shocks  ? 

*  On  his  return  (April,  1841)  from  Washington,  Mr.  Woodbury  was  met  by  a  large 
number  of  his  political  friends,  and  escorted  into  Portsmouth.  He  was  addressed  by 
Mr.  Abner  Greenleaf,  chairman  of  the  committee  of  arrangements  for  the  occasion, 
and  the  above  speech  was  made  in  reply. 


RETURN  FROM  WASHINGTON.  541 

I  rejoice,  with  you,  that  here,  above  all  other  places,  the  vestal 
fire  of  those  principles  has  been  kept  alive  and  bright.  It  has  proved 
a  proud  beacon  to  light  the  steps  of  your  absent  children,  and,  flashing 
higher  and  wider,  as  in  the  last  contest,  after  some  despondency  else- 
where, it  is  an  omen  auspicious  for  the  whole  Union. 

Real  ignorance,  or  malignity  under  defeat,  has  at  times  attributed 
the  political  course  of  this  State  to  something  less  enlightened  in  her 
condition  than  in  other  places.  But,  in  vindication  of  her,  under  such 
aspersions,  it  gives  me  pleasure  to  repeat  on  her  own  soil,  where  a 
response  to  its  truth  must  gratefully  beat  in  every  heart,  that  no  peo- 
ple are  believed  to  possess  higher  advantages  for  obtaining  a  fund 
of  useful  information  and  practical  wisdom.  This  the  hardy  yeo- 
manry of  her  mountains  have  shown  by  undeniable  results.  As  an 
evidence  how  well  they  have  learned  their  true  interests,  no  less  than 
their  true  rights,  they  have  exercised  an  industry,  an  enterprise  and 
prudence,  which  have  kept  themselves  and  their  State  unencumbered 
by  burthensome  debt, —  have  secured  beside,  though  amidst  ice  and 
granite,  all  the  comforts  of  life,  and  have  crowned  the  whole  by  liber- 
ally sparing  more  money  for  free  education,  religious  and  literary,  than 
the  proudest  regions  from  which  they  have  been  assailed. 

In  truth,  the  sun  does  not  shine  on  a  land  where,  in  a  like  extent 
of  population,  the  spires  of  the  village  church  more  frequently  point 
the  path  to  heaven,  or  the  district  school-house  and  academy  oftener 
open  their  intellectual  treasures  to  the  young  and  aspiring.  These  are 
some  of  her  loftiest  monuments,  and  for  these  a  grateful  posterity  will 
admire  her  more  than  they  would  for  bronze  or  marble. 

But  turning  a  moment  more  particularly  to  this  portion  of  the  State, 
and  the  political  friends  who  now  so  cordially  welcome  my  return,  I 
know  that  some  differences  concerning  public  measures  must  exist 
among  your  community,  or  it  would  cease  to  be  free.  But  the  polit- 
ical integrity  of  those  here  with  whom  I  agree  on  public  matters,  and 
to  which  you  refer  in  your  address,  can  nowhere  be  more  commenda- 
ble, or  zealous,  or  firm,  though  at  times  struggling  under  what  has 
seemed  fearful  odds.  I  trust,  also,  experience  will  show  that  you  are 
right  in  the  hope  that  your  confidence  has  not  been  misplaced,  in 
looking  to  me,  among  others  in  our  national  councils,  to  defend  the 
principles  of  democracy.  But,  on  this  joyful  occasion  of  reunion  of 
neighbors  long  separated,  all  of  you,  as  well  as  myself,  are  doubtless 
willing  to  do  justice  to  those  with  whom  we  disagree.  Firm  and  ardent 
as  we  are  in  our  political  convictions,  we  can  still  cheerfully  recognize 
many  bonds  of  union  between  persons  possessing  a  common  home,  pur- 
suits in  several  respects  common,  a  similar  religious  faith,  a  litera- 
ture, government,  and,  I  may  add,  almost  every  hope  of  happiness 
here  or  hereafter,  founded  on  some  common  basis.  I  rejoice,  there- 
fore, that  the  harmony  of  personal  intercourse  among  us  has  gener- 
ally never  been  interrupted  by  mere  differences  of  opinion.  Between 
myself  and  your  community  as  a  whole,  however  divided  politically, 
46 


542  RETURN  FROM  WASHINGTON. 

there  has  long  existed  a  mutual  and  generous  personal  confidence ;  and 
I  have  not  and  cannot  hesitate  to  trust  to  its  friendly  protection  my 
hearth,  altar,  and  character  —  everything  held  dear. 

But  should  the  storm  of  faction,  of  any  kind,  hereafter  beat  upon 
me  from  any  quarter, —  and  few  places  or  parties  are  long  exempt 
from  them,— they  can  have  no  terrors  for  one  surrounded,  as  I  am 
now,  by  the  lion  hearts  that  have  dared  to  be  tolerant  and  just,  in  the 
worst  of  times. 

In  no  place  do  I  believe  that  the  lives,  principles,  and  professions, 
of  its  inhabitants  generally,  are  more  coincident,  or  more  honest  and 
true.  Fortune  may  have  showered  her  golden  favors  elsewhere  in 
greater  profusion,  but  nowhere,  in  the  hour  of  public  peril,  have  the 
generations,  whether  present  or  past,  ever  displayed  prompter  patriot- 
ism, and,  at  their  country's  call,  gone  forth  with  more  chivalry,  to 
bleed  gallantly  on  every  ocean  and  every  field  of  danger.  How,  then, 
will  it  be  possible  for  men  of  such  a  stock,  though  differing  some  in 
the  application  of  facts  and  principles,  ever  to  differ  much  and  long 
concerning  their  essence  or  tendency?  Can  any  of  them,  for  instance, 
look  with  tameness  on  the  surrender  of  national  rights,  by  any  admin- 
istration whatever  ?  On  the  contrary,  I  am  confident  that  most  of 
them  would  denounce  it  in  all  shapes  and  to  all  extents ;  whether  the 
proposition  originated  in  menaces  from  abroad,  accompanied  by  the 
gasconade  of  fleets  and  armies,  or  in  derogatory  combinations  at  home ; 
and  whether  it  should  abridge  our  territorial  limits,  or  shackle  those 
principles  of  free  trade,  and  those  privileges  of  navigation  and  the 
fisheries,  in  every  sea  our  enterprise  can  reach,  which  have  aided  so 
largely  to  enrich  the  whole  north,  and  make  the  Union  itself  second- 
ary in  its  commerce  to  only  one  government  in  the  world. 

Wasteful  extravagance,  also,  or  the  removal  of  those  securities 
which  experience  has  devised  to  guard  the  public  treasure,  or  contribu- 
tions forced  in  any  form  from  the  hard  earnings  of  the  thrifty  for  the 
benefit  of  speculators,  spendthrifts,  and  bankrupts,  can  never  be 
believed  to  occur,  and  at  the  same  time  be  long  tolerated  by  men 
who,  like  you,  obtain  their  money  through  honest  industry,  and  who 
know  well  that  the  people  at  large,  in  some  shape  or  other,  are  taxed 
to  furnish  all  public  means.  In  a  government  which  freemen  have 
helped  to  create  for  the  equal  protection  of  all,  how  can  many  of  them 
be  expected  to  countenance,  in  those  dressed  in  a  little  brief  author- 
ity, partial  legislation,  for  building  up  favorite  interests  or  favorite  sec- 
tions of  country  ?  The  question,  as  one  of  principle,  is  too  plain  for 
argument ;  nor  will  they  befriend,  on  any  subject,  what  they  may  be  con- 
vinced is  a  system  of  monopolies, —  a  system  hostile  alike  to  the  durable 
interests  of  the  seaman,  laborer,  mechanic,  merchant,  and  last,  but  not 
least,  the  farmer, —  aristocratic  in  tendency,  and  likely  to  become  more 
powerful  and  overshadowing  than  the  government  itself;  for  this  would 
be  to  befriend  or  submit  to  a  species  of  slavery,  and  one  the  more 
ignominious,  as  being  usually  to  money  alone,  rather  than  to  superior 


RETURN   FROM  WASHINGTON.  543 

intellect,  goodness,  or  knowledge.  Still  more  vain  would  it  be  to  hope 
that  such  a  race  will  ever  long  bear  to  be  insulted  by  duplicity  or 
broken  pledges  of  any  kind  from  those  in  power,  and,  on  their  own 
soils  and  freeholds,  in  sight  of  their  fathers'  graves,  the  descendants 
of  the  Langdons,  the  Halls,  the  Gardners,  and  the  Mannings,  endure 
to  be  proscribed  or  persecuted  like  conquered  helots. 

But  I  forbear,  lest  these  remarks  should  insensibly  glide  into  what 
is  susceptible  of  perversion.  This  much,  however,  can  be  added  with 
justice,  and  I  trust  without  offence, —  that,  come  when,  where,  or  how, 
danger  may,  a  people  like  those  before  me  will  always  scent  tyranny 
in  the  breeze,  and,  knowing  their  rights,  as  free,  equal,  and  independ- 
ent citizens  of  the  freest  republic  on  the  globe,  they  will,  without  regard 
to  sects  and  schisms,  always  be  ready  to  maintain  those  rights. 

If  attempts  be  made  to  cajole  you  as  to  the  true  extent  or  character 
of  them,  tell  the  offenders  from  this  hall,  dedicated  to  one  of  the  great 
apostles  of  liberty,  that  they  are  the  rights  explained  by  him  in  the 
immortal  Declaration  of  Independence,  and  which  our  ancestors,  after 
a  painful  succession  of  sufferings,  sought  to  guarantee  by  their  wise 
constitution  and  just  laws,  as  well  as  by  the  republican  virtues  they 
inculcated  on  their  posterity. 

Without  those  rights,  whatever  name  is  given  to  ourselves  or  our 
institutions,  our  condition  must  become  one  of  base  servitude ;  and  in 
times  past  all  has  been  often  risked  in  their  defence,  and  all  will  be 
again,  because,  whether  we  come  off  victors  or  martyrs,  nothing  can 
be  clearer  than  that  our  duties,  no  less  than  inclination  and  honor, 
equally  forbid  us  either  to  live  or  die  slaves. 

I  cannot  misunderstand  the  ardent  eyes  which  meet  mine  in  every 
direction ;  and  I  know  that  your  pulses  must  beat  warm  with  the  con- 
viction that  these  are  opinions  and  resolves  which  the  great  mass  of 
you  hold  in  common,  and  which  you  will  never  part  with,  whether 
here,  at  the  altar  or  the  domestic  fireside,  whether  in  public  or  private 
trust,  and  whether  as  citizens  of  New  Hampshire  or  the  Union. 

Regardless,  then,  of  misconstruction  or  calumny,  I  have  taken  the 
liberty  to  express  my  belief  that  thus  we  mutually  think,  and,  by 
God's  blessing,  thus  will  do. 

After  this  response,  and  a  personal  exchange  of  salutations  between 
Mr.  Woodbury  and  his  fellow-gitizens  at  large,  who  came  forward  to 
welcome  him  with  the  most  unfeigned  cordiality,  the  committee  of 
arrangements,  with  the  board  of  selectmen,  accompanied  him  to  his 
lodgings  at  the  Rockingham  House,  where  he  had  taken  rooms  for  him- 
self and  family,  until  his  effects  should  arrive  from  Washington,  and 
his  house  be  prepared  for  his  reception. 


544  PRESIDENT   POLK. 


PRESIDENT  POLK. 


Mr.  President  : — Allow  me,  in  behalf  of  my  fellow-citizens  of  the 
ancient  town  of  Portsmouth,  New  Hampshire,  to  welcome  you  to  their 
hospitalities.  Interchanges  of  personal  civility  between  a  people  and 
their  chief  magistrate  are  usually  attended  by  the  happiest  influences. 
We  know  and  are  known  better  by  being  face  to  face,  and  heart  to 
heart ;  and  it  rejoices  us  thus  to  enjoy  an  opportunity  to  draw  closer  the 
cords  which  kindly  bind  together  the  true  source  of  all  political  power, 
and  those  deemed  worthy  to  administer  it.  We  greet  you,  therefore, 
sir,  to  our  hearths  and  altars,  as  the  highest  administrator  of  that 
power  for  more  than  twenty  millions  of  free  and  prosperous  people.  It 
is  this  which  makes  our  hearts  overflow  with  gladness  to  see  you  tread 
our  granite  soil ;  for  we  do  not  presume  to  boast  of  its  great  fertility 
in  any  crops,  unless  it  be  in  crops  of  men, —  high-minded  men,  "  who 
know  their  rights,  and,  knowing,  dare  maintain."  It  is  this  that  makes 
us  exult  to  have  you  gaze  on  our  mountains,  and  not  that  they  are  the 
abodes  of  wealth  and  grandeur;  but,  on  the  contrary,  the  faithful 
nurses  of  our  share — we  hope  our  full  share — of  hardy  industry,  of 
well-tried  bravery,  both  in  "flood  and  field,"  of  enlightened  liberty, 
of  sterling  patriotism,  and  all  the  republican  virtues.  Indeed,  sir,  you 
see  here  one  of  those  prolific  northern  hives,  which  yearly  sends  off  its 
swarms  over  the  western  continent,  to  gather,  and,  it  is  trusted,  diffuse, 
much  that  is  useful,  wherever  they  wander.  Liberty  and  law,  order 
and  industry,  are  inscribed  on  the  banners  under  which  they  march 
and  conquer. 

In  this  immediate  neighborhood,  sir,  we  invite  you  to  examine  the 
scenes  of  the  earliest  settlement  of  our  State; — the  noble  river,  on 
whose  banks  stands  its  venerable  commercial  capital,  whither  our 
fathers  came  for  a  freer  trade,  as  well  as  freer  worship  of  their  God ; 
the  beautiful  navy-yard  near  us,  in  whose  environs  was  built  the 
first  ship-of-the-line  since  our  independence,  and,  it  is  believed,  the  first 
frigate  in  America ;  and  lastly,  to  inspect  the  gallant  fort  which  opens 
its  cannon  on  the  ocean  at  the  mouth  of  our  harbor,  to  aid  in  our 
protection,  under  any  unhallowed  invasion  of  our  soil. 

We  look  anxiously  towards  the  means  of  public  usefulness  increased 
here  by  the  dry  dock,  which  has  been  happily  authorized  under  your 
administration,  cherishing,  as  we  do,  a  strong  conviction  that  such 
expenditures  tend  to  render  imperishable  that  great  principle,  now 
embodied  into  the  American  code  of  public  law, —  "  Millions  for 
defence,  but  not  a  cent  for  tribute."     Every  war  steamer, — and  we 

*  An  address  made  to  President  Polk,  on  the  occasion  of  his  visit  to  Portsmouth, 
1846. 


PRESIDENT   POLK.  545 

hope  to  see  many  grow  up  from  this  cradle  of  our  navy, — every  ship- 
of-war  of  any  kind  that  shall  float  from  our  harbor,  under  a  svstem 
like  this,  will  be  a  monument  to  the  world  of  that  great  principle,  as 
striking  as  if  all  her  flags  and  canvas  were  emblazoned  over  with  it  in 
letters  of  gold. 

In  conclusion,  Mr.  President,  permit  me  to  add,  that  but  one  pulse 
beats  in  every  heart  in  this  vast  multitude  around  me, — from  smiling 
youth  to  decrepit  age, — and  that  is,  with  the  earnest  wish  that  you 
may  possess  leisure  to  see  everything  here  of  public  interest,  may 
meet  with  no  accident  to  mar  the  enjoyments  of  your  northern  tour, 
and,  above  all,  may  carry  back  with  you  the  discovery  of  new  cements 
of  the  common  brotherhood  between  us  and  the  giant  west  and  high- 
principled  south, — new  attractions  to  bind  us  all  closer  and  firmer  for- 
ever in  one  sacred  and  harmonious  union. 
46* 


APPENDIX. 


APPENDIX. 


WAR  WITH  GREAT  BRITAIN,    1812.* 


ADDRESS  TO   THE   PRESIDENT   OF   THE   UNITED    STATES. 


Sir  :  —  One  hundred  and  eighty-nine  delegates,  from  all  the 
towns  in  the  County  of  Hillsborough  and  State  of  New  Hampshire, 
have  convened  at  Weare.  They  are  attended  by  more  than  fifteen 
hundred  of  their  constituents.  Among  them  are  many,  as  their  signa- 
tures will  show,  who  are  proud  to  have  participated  in  our  Revolution, 
and  also  to  behold,  as  their  associates  in  this  convention,  the  flower 
of  our  yeomanry,  our  mechanics  and  manufacturers.  Such  numbers 
and  character  will  perhaps  justify  us  in  addressing  the  chief 
magistrate  of  our  Union,  and,  without  presumption,  expecting  from 
him  a  regard  to  the  sentiments  we  may  express,  as  emanating,  at  least, 
from  an  honest  and  respectable  source.  The  citizens  of  this  county, 
sir,  have,  in  common  with  their  countrymen,  suffered  long  from  aggres- 
sions of  the  European  belligerents.  And  though  their  pressure  has 
fallen  more  directly  and  more  heavily  on  some  others,  yet  the  circuit- 
ous evils  of  them  have  visited  us  with  no  small  privations.     But  com- 

*  This  was  a  convention  of  much  importance.  Hon.  Robert  Alcock  was  chosen 
president;  Gen.  Benjamin  Pierce,  David  L.  Morrill,  Esq.,  and  Gen.  David  Steele, 
vice-presidents ;  Henry  E.  Chase  and  John  Burnam,  Esqs.,  secretaries. 

This  Address  and  Resolves  to  the  President  of  the  United  States,  and  Address  to 
the  people  of  Hillsborough  County,  were  read  and  adopted  by  the  delegates,  and  after- 
wards read  to  the  whole  convention,  and  unanimously  appi-oved.  It  was  voted,  that 
they  be  signed  by  the  president,  and  countersigned  by  the  secretaries,  transmitted 
to  the  President  of  the  United  States  ;  and  that  they  be  published  in  the  New  Hamp- 
shire Patriot  and  Democratic  Republican. 

This  Address  was  the  first  political  performance  of  Mr.  Woodbury,  and  gave  him 
eai'ly  reputation.     When  he  wrote  it  he  was  twenty-three  years  of  age. 


550  WAR  WITH   GREAT   BRITAIX.  1812. 

plaint  has  hitherto  been  foreborne,  from  a  reliance  on  the  -wisdom  and 
integrity  of  our  government.  This  confidence,  we  are  happy  to  per- 
ceive, was  not  misplaced.  After  a  series  of  injuries,  negotiations, 
and  indignities,  which  would  long  before  have  exhausted  the  patience 
of  any  people  and  rulers  less  wedded  to  peace  than  the  American, 
they  have  at  length  risen  in  the  violated  majesty  of  a  nation's  rights, 
and  hurled  the  gauntlet  at  their  oppressors.  Even  France  they 
are  pledged  to  attack,  unless  atonement  shall  be  proffered  by  her,  ere 
satisfaction  has  been  wrested  from  England.  This  bold,  magnanimous 
deed,  of  the  twelfth  Congress,  was  beheld  by  many  with  sentiments  of 
approbation.  In  fancy,  the  heroes  of  our  Revolution  reappeared,  pro- 
claiming the  charter  of  American  independence;  and  we  fondly 
anticipated  that  all  its  friends  would  once  more  press  forward  in  sup- 
port of  it,  and,  as  our  ancestry,  devote  "  their  lives,  their  fortunes, 
and  their  sacred  honor."  Has  this  hope  been  disappointed,  or  are  its 
foes  —  the  enemies  of  republics  —  those  alone  who  raise  the  cry  of 
distrust  and  sedition  ?  The  latter,  patriotism,  as  well  as  facts,  would 
induce  us  to  believe,  is  more  probably  the  truth ;  for,  while  ancient 
differences  of  party  have  vanished,  and  men  of  integrity,  of  genius 
the  most  brilliant,  and  reputation  the  most  extensive,  rally  round  our 
constituted  authorities,  the  voice  of  complaint  vibrates  now,  as  ever, 
from  a  few  relics  of  our  Revolutionary  opposition  —  a  few  systematic 
revilers  of  the  people,  and  a  clan  of  their  respective  sycophants.  That 
voice,  elevated  against  an  administration  which  vast  majorities  have 
selected,  stigmatizing  its  measures,  of  whatever  character,  with  imbe- 
cility, corruption  or  wickedness; — that  voice,  hoarse  with  threatening 
resistance  to  law,  and  summoning  all  the  myrmidons  of  monarchy  and 
faction  to  demolish  our  confederacy ;  —  that  voice  has  blown  the  tocsin 
of  alarm  over  our  retired  villages,  and  awakened  the  republicans  of 
Hillsborough  County  to  refute,  in  a  collective  manner,  its  misrepre- 
sentation of  their  sentiments.  What !.  shall  such  panders  of  sedition, 
and  their  newspaper  hirelings,  and  the  merchants  of  British  capital, 
with  their  deluded  disciples  and  abject  dependants,  —  shall  these  men 
dare  to  guide  or  seek  the  opinions  of  our  great  mechanic,  manufac- 
turing and  agricultural  phalanx  1  Shall  they  describe  us  alienated 
from  the  administration,  because  agonizing  under  that  injustice  of  the 
belligerents,  against  which  this  administration  amicably  negotiated  till 
the  olive  withered?  Shall  they  describe  us  hostile  to  war,  because  it 
remains  the  sole  weapon  to  wield  against  their  indignities  and  aggres- 
sions,— their  rooted  animosity  and  ferocious  jealousies'?  Shall  they 
describe  us  ripe  for  a  rupture  of  the  Union,  and  all  the  horrors  of 
civil  butchery,  because  that  Union  was  created  by  the  founders  of  our 
independence,  nurtured  by  their  example,  and  enforced  by  their  pre- 
cepts 1  Because  its  benefits  are  innumerable, —  extending  our  empire 
and  augmenting  our  opulence,— a  rainbow  in  peace  and  meteor  in 
war?  These  things,  sir,  have  constituted  a  crisis,  admitted  to  be 
momentous  and  alarming ;  yet,  being  forced  on  us,  according  to  our 


551 

belief,  by  the  joint  iniquity  of  foreign  and  domestic  foes,  we  will  never, 
tliough  deprecating  its  inevitable  evils,  never  flee  from  it,  as  cowards 
or  traitors ;  but  rather  face  undaunted  the  enemies  of  our  republic, 
with  our  full  portion  of  the  energies  which  God  has  lavished  on  seven 
millions  of  freemen.  In  such  emergencies,  an  enlarged  exposition  of 
the  feelings  and  opinions  of  electors  is  seldom  unacceptable  to  those 
who  are  in  authority.     It  is  therefore 

Resolved,  That  we  consider  the  great  compact,  which  binds  in  con- 
federation these  United  States,  a  national  act — an  act  which  should  be 
supported,  and  reverenced,  and  perpetuated,  as  the  ark  of  our  political 
salvation ;  for,  among  other  reasons,  having  legally  emanated  from  a 
vast  majority  of  the  people,  it  has  become  a  law,  —  one  too  of  the 
highest  obligation,  —  one  as  to  all  others  what  God's  are  to  man's,  and 
which,  as  Washington,  that  father  and  hero  of  our  country  enjoined, 
we  should  not  even  speak  of,  but  "as  the  palladium  of  our  liberties," 
and  not  countenance  so  much  as  "  a  suspicioji  that  it  can,  in  any  event, 
be  abandoned." 

Resolved,  That  all  laws  enacted  under  this  confederation,  and 
according  to  its  provisions,  ought  to  be  fulfilled,  encouraged,  and 
respected  ;  because  they  are  formed  with  our  consent,  constitutionally 
expressed  through  a  majority  of  our  representatives,  and  have  thus 
not  only  received  the  sanction  of  all,  but  the  allegiant  oaths  of 
many  to  their  support ;  and  consequently  a  breach  of  them  will  entail 
upon  its  authors  deliberate  falsehood  or  flagrant  perjury,  as  well  as 
jeopard  the  whole  fabric  of  our  civil  polity. 

Resolved,  That  it  is  not  with  acquiescence,  but  with  astonishment, 
— not  with  emotions  of  sympathy,  but  with  abhorrence  and  detestation, 
—  we  have  witnessed  men  who  call  themselves  Americans  threaten- 
ing to  prostrate  all  these  barriers  of  moral  and  political  duty,  scatter- 
ing disaffection  and  revolt  into  the  very  bosom  of  our  families,  and 
assailing  that  Union  and  those  laws  with  the  firebrands  of  calumny, 
rebellion  and  death :  and  our  reasons  for  indulging  this  sentiment  are, 
that  though  the  leaders  of  "an  artful  and  enterprising  minority"  have 
often  avowed  contempt  for  our  republic,  and  hostility  to  our  confedera- 
tion ;  though  suspected  of  intrigues  for  even  the  overthrow  of  the  one 
and  dismemberment  of  the  other ;  though  they  have  once  disconcerted 
our  government  by  an  approximation  to  that  catastrophe,  and,  for 
diverting  the  people  from  a  scrutiny  of  their  machinations,  have  brought 
every  unholy  engine  to  bear  upon  the  passion,  prejudice,  and  sordid 
interests  of  community;  though,  as  Arnold  accused  the  Congress  of  '76 
with  subjection  to  French  influence,  so  have  Arnold  geniuses  accused 
that  of  1812 ;  though,  as  the  Rivingtons  of  our  Revolution  strove  to 
excite  sectional  interests  between  the  north  and  south,  and  to  taint  our 
fraternal  blood  with  jealousies  the  most  reprobate,  so  have  hirelings  at 
the  present  day ;  though,  as  Washington  himself,  being  a  Virginian, 
was  branded  with  southern  partialities,  and,  according  to  Marshall, 
menaced,  in  the  very  midst  of  our  struggle  for  independence,  with 


552  WAR   WITH    GREAT   BRITAIN,    1812. 

removal  from  office,  so  has  been  the  fate  of  many  of  his  surviving 
co-patriots  and  disciples;  though,  in  alliance  with  these,  whole  hosts  of 
perturbed  spirits  have  been  conjured  up  from  that  pride  and  ambition 
which  had  "rather  rule  in  hell  than  serve  in  heaven;"  and  this  at 
the  very  crisis  when  each  link  in  the  chain  of  Union  should  be 
brightened  to  a  sunbeam, — yet  ive  continue  still  undismayed.  The 
friends  to  our  constitution,  whether  republican  or  federal,  will  form  a 
pillar  of  adamant,  which  shall  break  this  tempest  that  beats  around  it. 
And  though  surprised  at  such  depravity,  its  very  hideousness  will  arm 
them  to  its  discomfiture  with  an  indestructible  energy,  —  an  energy 
sanctified  by  the  justness  of  our  cause,  and  a  reliance  on  that  same 
arm  which  was  made  bare  for  the  salvation  of  our  fathers. 

Resolved,  That  after  the  passing  of  laws,  deliberation  should  for  a 
space  yield  to  action.  Time  for  opposing  their  policy  has  been 
enjoyed ;  and  a  competent  tribunal  has  rendered  judgment.  By  that 
we  will  abide,  till  all  legislative  acts  presumptively  good,  because 
approved  by  a  majority,  are,  after  full  experiment,  ascertained  to  be 
bad.  The  people  and  their  representatives  will  then  personally  realize 
this,  and  their  repeal  inevitably  ensues.  But,  as  the  disorganizing  and 
turbulent  have  attempted,  by  assemblages,  to  misrepresent  popular 
opinion,  particularly  on  the  late  measures  of  our  government,  we  feel 
constrained  to  come  forward  and  express  in  their  favor  our  detailed 
and  almost  unqualified  approbation;  and  this,  among  a  myriad  of  other 
reasons,  because  the  conduct  of  both  the  great  belligerents  has  towards 
this  country  been  long  and  systematically  hostile.  For  evidence  of 
that,  we  rely  not  on  declamation,  but  appeal  to  facts.  It  is  perhaps 
enough  for  us  to  forget  the  attack  on  our  liberties,  the  conflagration  of 
our  sea-ports,  and  murder  of  our  ancestors,  during  the  war  for  independ- 
ence ;  and  that  these  outrages  were  inflicted  only  because  we  had  pre- 
viously fled  thither  to  a  wilderness  inhabited  by  barbarians,  esteemed  less 
ferocious  than  our  British  persecutors,  —  because  we  had  here  laid,  in 
tears  and  blood,  the  base  of  a  new  empire,  which  presented  wealth  for 
their  plunder  and  power  for  their  jealousy.  But  that  perfidy,  originat- 
ing from  the  same  principle,  which  appeared  in  a  non-compliance  with 
some  articles  of  the  subsequent  reluctant  peace,  particularly  in  a  reten- 
tion of  the  western  posts,  that  produced  the  desolation  of  our  frontier  in 
the  burning  and  butcheries  of  Indian  warfare,  and  humiliated  us 
by  tribute  to  the  savages,  and  planted  in  their  breasts  thorns  of 
revenge,  which  have  grown,  rankled,  and  devastated,  to  the  present 
moment, — these,  we  confess,  cannot  so  easily  be  forgotten.  And  though 
Jay's  treaty,  however  disapproved  by  many  of  the  wise  and  good,  and  even 
by  Washington,  and  was  considered  but  as  a  choice  of  evils, —  though 
that  might  have  imposed  on  us  silence,  while  strictly  adhered  to,  and  its 
temporary  provisions  existing, — yet  the  subject  of  impressment  was 
collusively  excluded  from  it ;  and  all  its  articles,  but  the  permanent 
ones,  have  long  since  expired,  amidst  our  wishes  and  endeavors  for  its 
renewal  on  an  honorable  basis.     This  last  assertion  let  the  arrange- 


WAR  WITH   GREAT  BRITAIN,  1812.  553 

ment  with  Erskine  corroborate ;  let  the  labors  of  Pinckney  and  Monroe 
confirm.  For  the  very  persons  who  rail  so  loudly  at  the  rejection  of 
their  contemplated  treaty  ought  to  be  conscious  that  it  contained 
what  clearly  demonstrates  England's  exorbitant  pretensions  and 
America's  conciliatory  spirit.  One  glance  at  the  instrument  must 
convince  them  that  its  clauses  on  the  East  India  trade  and  enforce- 
ment of  our  commercial  restrictions,  if  no  others,  were  totally  inadmis- 
sible. Distinguished  statesmen  of  both  parties  have  also  pronounced 
tins.  The  question  of  improvement,  too,  was  again,  as  in  Jay's  treaty, 
postponed  to  a  supplement.  Indeed,  this  last  topic,  so  incalculable  in 
its  interest,  had,  early  as  1792,  rendered  it,  in  Washington's  opinion, 
'•necessary  that  their  government  should  explain  themselves  on  the 
subject,  and  be  led  to  disavow  and  punish  such  conduct."  This  he 
directed  to  Jefferson,  his  illustrious  Secretary,  as  also  to  inform  our 
minister  at  the  cabinet  of  St.  James  that  "the  vessel  being  American 
should  be  evidence  that  the  seamen  on  board  her  are  such;"  and  if  "a 
settlement  of  this  point"  was  not  soon  completed,  there  would  be 
"  difficulty  in  avoiding  our  making  immediate  reprisals  on  their  sea- 
men here." 

Mr.  Jay  ought  on  this  basis  to  have  effected  "that  settlement,"  con- 
sidered by  our  political  father  so  indispensable  and  momentous ;  but,  in 
the  hurry  of  concluding  his  treaty,  says  Pickering,  "  among  the  articles 
left  unadjusted,  one  of  the  most  interesting  nature  regards  the  impress- 
ing of  American  seamen;"  and  that,  with  others,  as  before  observed, 
was  expressly  stipulated  to  be  afterwards  supplied.  The  credulous 
ambassador  left  England  under  this  belief,  and  also  indulging,  as  he 
observes,  "a  pleasing  expectation  that  orders  will  be  given  that  Amer- 
icans "  impressed  "  be  immediately  liberated ;  and  that  persons  honored 
with  his  majesty's  commissions  do  in  future  abstain  from  such 
violence"  But  Mr.  King  was  sent  out;  Mr.  Listen  arrived;  negotia- 
tions were  recommended;  and  all  these  "pleasing  expectations"  ter- 
minated, not  in  an  additional  a-rticle  to  the  treaty,  not  in  a  release  of 
our  countrymen,  not  in  subsequent  forbearance  from  such  violence, 
but  in  a  mere  proposal,  which  even  President  Adams  reprobated ;  and 
our  minister  himself,  since  federal  candidate  for  Vice-president  (Mr. 
King),  indignantly  spurned,  as  sanctioning  "a  principle  which  might 
be  productive  of  greater  evils  than  those  it  was  our  aim  to  prevent." 
And  can  they  be  friends  to  our  country  who,  even  now,  reiterate  that 
Great  Britain  has  always  been  willing  honorably  to  adjust  tins  barba- 
rous custom?  In  1806,  to  be  sure,  Mr.  Monroe,  after  much  toil, 
obtained  from  her  a  mere  concession  on  impressment  "  both  honorable 
and  advantageous  to  the  United  States ; "  yet  even  that  concession  was 
refused  by  her  to  be  incorporated  with  his  treaty,  and  has  since  been 
disclaimed  by  proclamation  and  practice.  And  could  Mr.  Foster,  in 
his  boasted  letter,  intend  anything  else  but  adding  insult  to  injury,  by 
proposing  to  release  all  who  should  be  proved  natives  of  America } 
For  have  not  we  the  same  privilege  as  England  to  naturalize  foreign- 
47 


554  WAR  WITH   GREAT   BRITAIN,   1812. 

ers,  and  then  protect  them,  with  other  citizens,  by  our  flag  7  This 
denial  to  others  what  she  claims  to  herself,  says  Chief-justice  Marshall, 
converts  ''the  practice  into  a  question  of  power,  and  not  of  right." 
But  even  " natives  of America ,"  says  he,  "they  are  impressed;  they 
are  dragged  on  board  British  ships-of-war,  with  evidence  of  their  citi- 
zenship in  their  hands,  and  forced  by  violence  there  to  serve,  until 
conclusive  testimonials  of  their  birth  can  be  obtained."  "  These,"  says 
he,  "must  generally  be  sought  for  on  this  side  of  the  Atlantic.  In 
the  mean  time,  acknowledged  violence  is  practised  on  a  free  citizen  of 
the  United  States,  by  compelling  him  to  engage  and  continue  in  foreign 
service."  "  The  mere  release  of  the  injured,  after  a  long  course  of  ser- 
vice and  suffering,  is  no  compensation  for  the  past,  and  no  security 
for  the  future."  If,  then,  such  be  the  facts,  such  the  principles,  and 
such  their  authority,  we  ask  what  measures  should  have  been  adopted  ? 
To  liberate  one  citizen  from  confinement,  Greece  welcomed  a  ten  years' 
war.  Will  the  opponents  of  government,  then,  inform  us  how  much 
longer  time  ought  to  have  been  employed,  —  to  use  the  judge's  lan- 
guage,—  in  "unsuccessful  remonstrance  and  unavailing  memorials," 
with  above  six  thousand  of  our  citizens  in  bondage  1 

But  the  rapacity  of  England  could  not  so  violate  the  rights  of  per- 
son, without  assailing  also  those  of  property.  A  commerce  bleaching 
every  sea  was  too  tempting  a  prey.  Jealousy  of  our  naval  greatness, 
a  dearth  of  resources  to  support  her  own  vast  expenditures,  and  that 
wantonness,  that  abandonment  of  principle,  which  power  frequently 
engenders  in  a  conflict  with  mere  right,  all  combined  to  produce  those 
gradual  aggressions  on  our  neutrality  which  have  augmented  to  their 
present  heinousness  and  ruin.  In  1805  they  burst  forth  in  a  manner 
the  most  flagrant  and  unwarrantable.  The  rule  of  '56  was  revived, — 
a  measure  which,  by  one  fell  swoop,  conveyed  almost  our  whole  car- 
rying trade  into  the  grasp  of  British  cruisers.  No  provocation,  no 
State  necessity,  no  settled  principle  of  national  law,  could  or  was  pre- 
tended to  extenuate  this  deed  of  piracy.  And  hence,  a  long  year 
before  blockades  or  decrees,  or  the  orders  in  council,  all  our  sea-ports 
covered  the  tables  of  Congress  with  supplications  for  war, — war  against 
England.  Even  the  Senate,  that  body  so  grave  and  deliberate,  with 
not  one  dissentient  vote,  pronounced  it  "an  unprovoked  aggression 
upon  the  property  of  the  citizens  of  these  United  States,  a  violation 
of  their  neutral  rights,  and  an  encroachment  upon  their  national  inde- 
pendence." And  can  some  of  these  very  men  now  protest  that  Great 
Britain  has  done  us  "no  essential  injury"?  That  the  war  is  "impol- 
itic, unnecessary,  unjust "  1  That  "France  was  the  first  aggressor"  ? 
We  have  not  time,  had  we  the  disposition,  to  wade  through  that  morass 
of  blockades,  decrees  and  orders,  which  succeeded  this  wanton  attack 
on  our  commercial  rights.  All  of  them,  however,  and  particularly  the 
last,  even  Mr.  Bayard  denominates  "destructive  to  neutrals,"  and 
"covering  injustice  with  the  cloak  of  retaliation."  "They  violate," 
says  he,  "  the  plainest  rights  of  the  nation."     "  It  is  a  doctrine  which 


WAR   WITH   GREAT   BRITAIN,  1812.  555 

we  must  resist."  And  we  have  resisted  it.  Honor,  interest,  justice, 
all  summoned  us  to  resist  it.  The  insulting  repetition,  too,  of  Mr. 
Foster,  but  a  few  weeks  prior  to  the  18th  of  June,  ''that  Great  Britain 
cannot  relinquish  her  retaliatory  system  on  France,"  or,  in  other 
words,  her  determination  and  right,  in  contending  with  Bonaparte,  to 
sacrifice  the  commerce  of  America,  unless  we  compelled  him  to  '"'rescind 
absolutely  and  unconditionally"  his  decrees, — that  is,  in  relation  to  all 
the  world,  as  well  as  the  United  States,  —  this,  we  believe,  was  not 
wanting  to  Jill  the  cup  of  insolence  and  iniquity.  And  though  by  us 
it  is  regretted  that  six  years  since  "the  republican  banner"  had  not 
been  "unfurled"  against  the  then  only  aggressor,  before  nine 
hundred  and  seventeen  of  our  ships  had  fallen  victims  to  her 
injustice,  yet  we  consider  the  postponement  of  hostilities  a  proof, 
incontestably  as  solemn,  of  our  invincible  attachment  to  peace.  It  is 
known,  and  even  demonstrable,  that  neither  the  present  or  past  admin- 
istrations are  lovers  of  war.  In  avoiding  it,  their  forbearance  became 
the  very  theme  of  ridicule.  But  it  was  a  failing  that  "leaned  on 
virtue's  side  ;"  and  from  which  to  redeem  themselves  their  prepara- 
tory measures  have  already  produced  a  suspension  of  the  English 
orders,  —  an  honorable  repeal  of  which,  with  the  adjustment  of  all 
points  in  dispute,  we  confidently  believe,  energy  and  fortitude  in  the 
cabinet  will  eventually  effect.  This  war  is  regarded  as  one  of 
resources,  and  not  simply  of  men  or  ships.  While,  therefore,  occa- 
sional disasters  darken  the  lustre  of  frequent  victory,  we  still  look  to 
no  distant  termination  of  it.  But  the  greatest  caution  should  be  exer- 
cised in  renewing  negotiations  with  that  court,  which  disavowed  the 
arrangement  of  Erskine,  and  whose  present  prime  minister  pledged 
himself  to  reward  Henry  for  encouraging  the  dismemberment  of  our 
Union.  This  last  act  of  perfidy  and  crime,  whatever  may  have  been 
its  success  or  reward,  is  among  all  governments  regarded,  in  its  patrons, 
advocates,  or  abettors,  as  equally  abhorrent.  "  It  is,"  says  Vattel, 
"  a  violation  of  the  law  of  nations,  to  persuade  those  subjects  to  revolt, 
who  actually  obey  their  sovereign,  though  they  complain  of  his  gov- 
ernment," —  "an  atrocious  injury,"  "if  any  one  attempts"  it  "by 
his  emissaries: "  And  ought  a  free  people,  an  independent  sover- 
eignty, tamely  to  submit  to  such  trifling  %  Is  it  to  be  endured,  that 
amidst  the  rotation  of  all  their  miserable  expedients  to  benumb  our 
public  feeling,  avert  merited  reprisals,  and  palsy,  if  not  annihilate,  our 
national  spirit,  —  is  it  to  be  endured,  we  say,  that  not  only  spies  shall 
be  missioned  into  the  heart  of  our  country,  but  the  savages  also,  their 
merciless  and  now  open  allies,  be  let  loose  on  our  frontiers,  "  to  wake 
the  sleep  of  the  cradle,"  butcher  our  wives,  and  apply  the  midnight 
torch  to  our  dwellings  ? 

Because  these,  and  a  host  of  other  offences,  cried  for  vengeance,  we 
therefore  approve  of  Avar, — war  against  the  first  aggressor  and  great- 
est aggressor,  —  against  one  at  a  time,  instead  oiboth)  and  if,  before 
an  adjustment  with  this,  the  other  belligerent  shall  not  atone  for  her 


556  WAR  WITH   GREAT  BRITAIN,  1812. 

plunder,  we  pledge  ourselves,  with  equal  sincerity,  to  assail  her  wher- 
ever vulnerable. 

Resolved,  That  this  contest,  however,  ought  not  to  be  prolonged 
unnecessarily ;  but  still  we  revolt  from  its  cessation  till  there  has  been 
procured  restitution  for  injuries  and  security  for  our  rights.  Because, 
although  the  trade,  navy,  and  sea-ports  of  America,  should  all  be  exter- 
minated, yet  a  peace  without  that  restitution  and  security  could  be 
neither  permanent  or  honorable.  Some  of  these  calamities  we  have 
now  partially  endured;  and  the  others,  if  happening,  shall,  rather  than 
depress,  only  inspire  us  with  redoubled  ardor  in  their  redress  ;  for,  as 
freemen,  we  view  submission  worse  than  misfortune,  deprecate  insult 
alike  with  aggressions,  and  welcome  poverty  before  disgrace.  Indeed, 
without  these  sentiments,  so  indispensable  to  respect,  independence, 
and  national  honor,  we  should  richly  merit,  what  England  seems  long 
to  have  meditated,  the  conversion  of  our  affluence,  our  liberty,  yea,  life 
itself,  into  an  infamy  and  a  curse.  In  our  desire  for  speedy  if  honor- 
able "peace  with  all  nations,"  let  it,  however,  be  understood,  that  we 
entreat  for  "entangling  alliance  with  none."  British  fraternity  and 
Trench  fraternity  are  equally  our  abhorrence  ;  and  while  others,  with 
much  parade,  disclaim  a  fondness  for  the  last  and  aversion  to  the  first, 
we,  in  our  republican  simplicity,  detest  both.  For,  perhaps,  almost  as 
little  exists,  deserving  admiration,  in  "that  bulwark  of  our  religion," 
which  even  now  tears  from  all  our  theological  sects  but  one  the  priv- 
ileges of  freemen,  which  has  burnt  hundreds  of  us  at  the  stake,  and 
exiled  as  many  thousands  more  to  the  mercy  of  barbarians  ;  in  "  that 
champion  for  the  liberties  of  the  world,"  who  once  jeoparded  ours, 
who  recently  robbed  Denmark  of  the  power  to  defend  hers,  and  who 
at  this  moment  makes  the  commerce  of  most  its  plunder,  the  seamen 
of  some  its  slaves,  and  whole  regions  of  the  east,  with  unhappy  Ireland, 
her  vanquished  and  guiltless  tributaries;  in  "that  last  hope  of 
nations,"  who  has  really  favored  few  that  she  has  not  gangrened  with 
corruption,  and  leagued  with  as  few  that  have  not  perished  in  her 
embrace.  It  is  seriously  repeated,  that  in  this  we  can  perceive  but 
little  more  to  admire  than  in  the  fickle,  perfidious  and  sanguinary 
Corsican.  But,  finally,  if  an  internal  foe,  as  many  appearances  indi- 
cate, has  conspired  with  the  external  one,  and  shall  actually  cooperate 
to  destroy  our  glorious  Union,  as  well  as  surrender  those  rights 
already  so  violated,  — 

Resolved,  That  we  will  embody  around  the  constitutions  of  our 
fathers  and  their  elected  guardians,  and  never  assent  to  peace  or  alli- 
ance till  victory  or  death ;  for,  if  our  republic  is  to  be  overturned,  if 
this  fair  fabric  of  freedom  is  destined  thus  to  fall,  rather  than  survive 
the  catastrophe,  we  deem  it  more  eligible,  as  well  as  magnanimous,  to 
bury  ourselves  under  its  splendid  ruins. 

ROBERT   ALCOCK,   President. 

Henry  B.  Chase,  )  gecretaries 

John  Burnam, 


WAR  WITH   GREAT   BRITAIN,    1812.  557 


ADDRESS   TO    THE   PEOPLE. 

We  are  delegates  from  a  respectable  number  of  our  fellow-citizens. 
We  have  taken  into  consideration  the  present  crisis,  and  adopted  such 
measures  as  the  great  occasion  seemed  to  require.  An  expression  of  our 
sentiments  has  been  forwarded  to  the  President  of  the  United  States, 
which  contained,  in  the  opinion  of  those  present,  a  fair  statement  of  the 
causes,  character  and  results,  of  this  emergency.  But  it  is  not  forgotten 
that  in  elections,  and  there  alone,  can  the  people  speak  fully  and  effect- 
ually. While,  therefore,  the  right  of  addressing  and  petitioning  our 
public  functionaries  should  never  be  surrendered,  it  ought  always  to 
be  considered  as  merely  advisory,  —  as  communicating  popular  senti- 
ment at  doubtful  and  alarming  exigencies,  and  not  as  strictly  obliga- 
tory on  the  measures  to  be  pursued.  In  our  primary  assemblies,  how- 
ever, you  can  dictate,  as  well  as  advise ;  and  in  them,  on  the  first  Monday 
of  November,  we  call  upon  the  honest  men  of  all  parties  and  profes- 
sions to  use  a  language,  by  their  votes,  which  cannot  be  misrepresented. 
We  dread  not  the  trial.  Your  sentiments  have  of  late  been  notoriously 
belled  by  the  factious  and  wicked.  Let  the  day  approach,  let  the  hour 
arrive,  when  the  question  must  be,  Will  you  elect  those  who  support,  or 
those  who  oppose,  our  own  government?  and  the  majesty  of  the  people 
shall  frown  into  obscurity  each  disorganizer,  rebel  and  traitor.  As  pre- 
paratory to  a  proper  performance  of  this  duty,  we  invoke  every  American 
to  regard  the  origin  of  his  constitution,  its  articles  and  present  admin- 
istration ;  to  regard  our  conduct  to  foreign  nations,  theirs  to  us,  and 
that  of  a  domestic  faction  to  both ;  and  then  dispassionately  decide 
whom  you  will  support.  If  our  form  of  government  be  republican ; 
if  it  be  a  union,  and  not  a  severance,  of  the  States ;  if  the  adminis- 
trators of  it  now  are  likewise  republicans,  and  approve  that  union, 
rather  than  its  severance ;  if  they  have  conducted  honestly  toward  all, 
and  yet  have  been  injured  and  insulted  by  some  in  return  ;  — and  if 
that  faction,  on  the  contrary,  have,  by  its  leaders,  avowed  enmity  to 
republics, — styling  them  "a  creature  of  fiction,  an  asp,  a  cockatrice," 
"that  it  could  exist  nowhere  but  in  theory,"  and  also  threatened  a 
severance  of  that  Union,  terming  it  "a  rope  of  sand,"  a  " millstone 
on  the  neck  of  New  England," — if  they  have  also  palliated,  and,  indeed, 
justified,  all  the  aggressions  of  our  enemy,  and  denounced  all  the  mod- 
eration .and  integrity  of  our  own  country,  —  then  we  conjecture  that 
your  decisions  will  be  with  wisdom  and  facility.  In  political  contro- 
versies, too,  among  ourselves,  "the  reign  of  terror"  introduced  by 
them  in  '98,  and  in  1812  reattempted,  must  create  more  abhorrence 
than  alarm, — more  foes,  we  believe,  than  converts.  Their  intolerance, 
their  menaces,  their  malignant  fabrications,  have  already  roused  to 
withstand  them,  from  the  calm  of  civil  life,  many  relics  of  the  Revolu- 
tion. Such  conduct  will  rouse  more.  It  will  and  must  engender  its 
47* 


558  WAK  WITH   GEEAT   BRITAIN,    1812. 

own  corrective.  Let,  then,  an  unceasing  opprobrium,  if  they  so  will  it, 
be  heaped  on  all  the  measures  of  our  administration.  It  is  not  punish- 
able under  the  republicans,  however  severely  it  was  under  the  feder- 
alists. Our  sacred  regard  to  independence  of  opinion  and  liberty  of 
the  press  pardons  this  licentiousness.  But  the  people  will  mark  its 
authors,  and  properly  reward  them, — not  by  retaliation,  not  by  mobs 
against  printers,  representatives  or  judges,  but  by  the  finger  of  public 
scorn,  and  the  omnipotence  of  elections.  So,  during  peace,  a  contin- 
ued justification  of  one  foreign  government,  and  as  continued  a  repro- 
bation of  another ',  is,  perhaps,  almost  equally  harmless  in  law,  though 
not  in  decency  and  friendship.  But,  when  a  constitutional  tribunal,  in 
a  constitutional  manner,  declares  war  against  one  of  those  powers,  it 
obviously  alters  the  character  of  such  conduct,  in  relation  to  that  power. 
For  then  it  becomes  in  fact,  if  not  form,  treacherous  ;  then,  whatever 
tends  to  or  actually  lowers  that  estimation  which  enemies  make  of 
our  justice,  our  wisdom,  resources,  courage  or  union,  persuades  them 
more  willingly  to  provoke,  and  enter,  and  prolong  the  conflict ;  and 
whatever  tends  to  or  actually  magnifies  their  virtue,  ability,  success, 
or  glory,  disheartens  us  in  the  assertion,  as  well  as  protection,  of  our 
rights,  and  directly  facilitates  the  path  to  their  surrender.  Can  this 
be,  toward  our  foes,  even  in  the  constitutional  definition  of  treason,  any- 
thing but  " giving  them  aid"?  Let  honest  men,  therefore,  of  all 
parties,  listen  to  the  conversation  and  peruse  the  writings  of  certain 
persons  since  the  declaration  of  war,  and  then  decide  whether  they 
have  conducted  like  friends  to  this  country,  and  deserve,  for  their 
meritorious  deeds,  election  to  office.  But  they  would  excuse  them- 
selves by  opposing  the  administration,  and  not  the  government.  Is  it 
lawful,  however,  to  resist  an  administration  by  bad  means,  and  that, 
too,  when  legal,  constitutional  ones  are  provided  1  By  means  which 
contribute  to  the  continuance  of  our  commercial  sufferings,  and  the 
perpetuity  of  hostilities  1  By  means  which  Washington  himself  pro- 
phetically denounced,  in  denouncing  all  political  societies,  as  "of  fatal 
tendency."  "They  serve,"  says  he,  "to  organize  faction,  to  give  it 
an  artificial  and  extraordinary  force  ;  to  put  in  place  of  the  delegated 
will  of  the  nation  the  will  of  a  party, — often  a  small,  but  artful,  enter- 
prising minority."  The  leaders  of  federalism,  however,  are  not  con- 
tent with  this.  They  do  more  than  oppose  the  administration,  and 
that,  too,  by  unlawful  means ;  they  oppose  even  the  government,  — 
yes,  the  constitution  itself  —  that  is,  a  republic.  They  have  pro- 
nounced it  "'inefficient,"  "unnatural,"  "impolitic."  Monarchy  has 
received  their  eulogies,  and  their  measures,  as  well  as  principles,  have 
tended  to  its  establishment.  That,  too,  is  a  confederation  of  the 
States.  They  have  menaced,  even  in  Congress,  that  this  confedera- 
tion should  be  dissolved, —  "  amicably  if  we  can,  forcibly  if  we  must." 
They  have  said  "we  should  live  better  separate  than  united;"  that 
"the  Union  is  neither  for  our  interest  or  safety."  They  have  exhorted 
the  people  now  to  resume  their  natural  rights,  and  hurl  defiance  at  the 


559 

constitutional  provisions.  All  these  things  are  too  notorious  for  denial ; 
because  reiterated  by  individuals,  journals  and  assemblages,  till  the  ear 
even  deafens.  But,  if  honest  federalists  disclaim  assent  to  these  enor- 
mities, like  a  Dexter  or  Pinckney,  then,  like  those  worthies,  let  them 
rally  round  the  legal  authorities ;  and  not  commit  the  absurdity  of 
reprobating  such  sentiments,  and  still  vote  for  those  who  utter  or 
patronize  them.  For  that  is  becoming  accessory,  if  not  principal,  to 
the  whole  decalogue  of  their  flagitious  tenets,  and  the  whole  series  of 
their  disorganizing  measures.  This  now  is  the  question,  —  Does  that 
candidate  you  are  incited  to  elect  act  for  the  government,  or  against 
it?  Consign,  for  a  moment,  all  other  distinctions  of  party  to  the  grave. 
Once  let  every  man  imitate  his  ancestry.  Once  become  Americans  in 
word  and  deed.  The  spirits  of  Franklin,  Warren,  and  Hancock, 
are  surely  not  extinct.  Regard  to  foreign  nations  must,  therefore,  be 
swallowed  up  in  devotion  to  our  own  ;  and  each  freeman,  when  about 
to  give  his  suffrage,  will  ask,  not  simply  what  is  professed,  but  what  has 
been  done,  by  him  he  shall  support.  The  inquiry,  great  and  impending, 
should  be,  Does  he  join,  does  he  belong  to,  that  faction,  who,  as  appears 
above,  oppose  our  oicn  government?  and  in  that  manner,  even  if  he 
be  inactive  himself,  yet,  by  uniting  with  them  and  increasing  their  num- 
ber, he  emboldens  or  abets  his  companions  to  pull  down  the  pillars  of 
our  constitution,  and  drag  us  all  as  suppliants  and  victims  to  the  altar 
of  British  mercy  !  After  full  deliberation  on  these  points,  your  breth- 
ren of  Vermont  have  acquitted  themselves  manfully.  They  have  suc- 
ceeded in  electing  their  candidates  by  majorities  of  thousands  ;  and,  in 
the  very  mouth  of  danger,  erected  themselves  into  a  wall  of  granite  on 
our  frontier,  as  impregnable  as  their  glory  shall  be  imperishable.  New 
Hampshire  loitered  not  behind  her  sister  State  in  the  Revolution ;  and 
we  can  now  also  calculate,  with  confidence,  that  she  will  ugo  and  do 
likewise" 

ROBERT   ALCOCK,    President. 

Henry  B.  Chase,  }  ~      .    . 

John  Buknam,        \  ®*r<*<™*- 


560  SPEECH   DELIVERED   IN   FANUEIL   HALL.    1841. 


A  SPEECH  DELIVERED  IN  FANEUIL  HALL,  OCT.  19,  1841. 
—  PARTY  SUBJECTS. 

I  AM  not  used  to  scenes  of  this  kind.  My  life  has  been  spent  rather 
in  courts  of  law,  in  senates,  and  the  secluded  labors  of  the  cabinet. 
But  why  should  I  hesitate  ox  fear  to  face  my  friends, — warm-hearted 
and  kind  friends, —  asking  my  presence  at  so  favored  a  spot,  in  a  great 
crisis  and  a  great  cause,  when  I  never  feared  to  face  even  enemies  in 
any  place  or  manner  the  most  inquisitorial  1  What  is  the  reason  of 
this  1  Nothing  in  the  humble  individual  before  you,  but  everything  in 
the  cause.  It  is  the  character  of  the  cause  in  which  we  are  all 
embarked,  the  progress  of  human  improvement  and  popular  rights, 
which  sustains  and  animates  us,  and  is,  indeed,  the  last  hope  of 
oppressed  humanity  in  every  quarter  of  the  globe. 

If  it  be  asked  why  such  a  charm  and  magnitude  should  be  attached 
to  it,  I  answer,  because,  though  intermingled,  at  times,  with  transient 
and  local  questions,  this  cause  enters  deep  and  wide  into  all  the  import- 
ant movements  in  society.  It  is  the  same  which,  under  different 
names,  forms,  and  aspects,  has  been  convulsing  the  social  system  since 
the  origin  of  our  race.  Its  principles  have  often  been  developed, — not 
always,  to  be  sure,  but  often, — in  the  struggles  between  the  few  and 
the  many  in  every  age ;  between  the  ambitious  and  the  lowly ;  avarice 
and  honest  industry ;  office  and  private  life ;  rank  and  the  masses ;  exclu- 
sive privileges  and  monopolies  against  equal  rights,  liberty,  and  free 
trade ;  strength  against  dependence ;  combination  and  coalition  against 
individual  weakness ;  and,  in  fine,  aristocracy  of  all  kinds,  whether  of 
birth,  money  or  power,  against  the  unpretending  democracy  of  num- 
bers. Exceptions,  without  doubt,  will  always  exist.  Yet  disguise,  and 
gloss  over,  or  pervert  facts  and  principles,  as  has  been  done  in  all 
countries,  some  of  the  interests  involved  in  such  conflicts  have  been 
alike  in  their  essence,  and,  amidst  all  sects  and  schisms,  have  contended 
for  supremacy,  like  the  fabled  deities  of  Darkness  and  Light,  in  some 
systems  of  philosophy,  struggling  constantly  for  the  government  of  the 
universe. 

But,  thanks  to  God,  we,  or  most  of  us  who  are  assembled  in  this 
place  consecrated  to  struggles  for  liberty  in  by-gone  days,  stand  ar- 
rayed on  the  liberal  side, — in  fine,  on  the  glorious  side  of  the  greatest 
good  to  the  greatest  number.  And  if  our  efforts  in  the  contest  now 
waging  among  and  around  us  are  proportioned  to  the  excellence  of  our 
cause,  we  shall  behold  the  greatest  number  espousing  it, — not  only  in 
our  sister  republics,  under  the  second  sober  thought  of  this  victorious 
autumn,  but  in  Massachusetts  herself,  whose  democratic  sons,  under 
all  reverses,  have  in  this  noble  cause  proved  themselves  unterrified  and 
renowned. 


1841.  561 

It  is  vain  to  attempt  to  separate  State  parties  and  State  contests 
from  the  influence  of  great  general  principles,  or  from  the  solicitude 
and  cooperation  of  others  engaged  in  their  support.  Those  principles 
are  interwoven  with  everything,  inseparably  as  light  and  heat.  It  is 
equally  vain  to  seek  to  disunite  them,  and  be  isolated  from  the  politics 
of  the  General  Government, — that  government  which  controls  the 
most  vital  interests  of  the  whole,  and,  in  its  operations  and  character, 
is  the  chief  exponent  of  all  to  the  rest  of  the  civilized  world.  To  talk 
of  such  solitary  grandeur  is  to  mistake  weakness  for  strength,  and  to 
lose  the  sympathies  which  make  us  one  and  all  aid  one  and  all  in  every 
important  struggle.  Separation  or  disunion  from  the  others,  in  a 
State  that  has  been  among  the  foremost,  by  flood  and  field,  no  less 
than  in  the  public  councils,  on  questions  affecting  the  whole  continent, 
would  also  be  treason  to  the  memory  of  the  illustrious  dead,  whose 
memorials  around  us  would  waken  almost  the  stones  of  your  streets  to 
exertion.  Indeed,  much  more,  in  one  view,  exists  to  animate  you 
than  roused  your  fathers  in  a  like  formidable  contest,  under  names 
and  principles  only  in  some  respects  different,  but  closely  similar  in 
tendency.  The  same  harbor,  but  now  crowded  with  masts  and  com- 
merce, spreads  its  waves  before  you  which  witnessed  their  intrepid  patri- 
otism in  the  general  cause, — in  the  cause  of  the  whole  continent, — 
to  destroy  all  means  of  collecting  a  tax  on  tea,  which  they  deemed 
unlawful  as  well  as  odious.  The  same  immortal  heights,  but  fuller 
with  population,  surround  your  city,  where  they  poured  out  their 
blood  like  water  to  defend  the  general  cause — the  rights  of  all  the 
colonies — against  usurped  power  and  perfidious  legislation  across  the 
Atlantic.  The  same  Cradle  of  Liberty — though  guarded  with  much 
greater  wealth  and  numbers,  as  well  as  improved  laws  and  freer 
institutions — can  again  rock  with  exhortations  against  general  as 
well  as  local  misrule,  and  against  an  army  of  venal  office-holders 
quartered  upon  the  people,  in  the  language  of  the  Declaration  of 
Independence,  to  eat  up  their  substance :  or,  in  the  fervid  eloquence 
of  your  own  Hancock,  to  dragoon  them  into  submission. 

Nor  are  you  men,  any  less  than  they,  formed  selfishly  to  hold  back 
in  a  national  crisis ;  with  less  of  mind,  soul  or  heart,  to  face  peril ;  or 
with  less  at  stake  of  wives,  children,  friends  and  homes, — or,  in  fine, 
of  "lives,  fortunes  and  sacred  honors."  No;  democracy  is  a  unit: 
and  democrats  will,  with  fraternal  confidence  and  with  martyr  zeal, 
unite  their  efforts,  till  they  can  unite  their  rejoicings  in  one  common 
triumph  through  the  Union. 

But,  beyond  and  above  all  which  actuated  your  fathers  to  take  an 
interest  in  their  elections,  and  discussions  as  to  what  concerned  the 
whole,  you  have  a  wider  and  greater  whole  to  cooperate  with :  — at 
home,  twenty-six  States  instead  of  thirteen  colonies ;  seventeen  mil- 
lions instead  of  only  three  millions  of  people  ;.*  — and  abroad,  new  coad- 

*  In  1851,  31  States,  and  a  population  of  23,347,884. 


562  SPEECH   DELIVERED   IN   FANEUIL   HALL,  1841. 

jutors ;  a  more  enlightened  age :  systems  and  principles,  if  not  new, 
yet  resuscitated  with  new  energy,  and  agitating  all  society,  and  the 
foundation  of  many  of  its  best  interests,  in  both  hemispheres.  They 
struggled  chiefly  against  particular  despots,  tyrants,  or  aristocrats ; 
you  contend  against  despotism  itself,  tyranny  itself,  and  aristocracy 
itself,  in  all  shapes,  plans  and  designs.  This,  in  some  degree,  has 
produced  a  new  era,  in  which  both  Americas  have  been  revolutionized 
and  Europe  reformed.  The  progress  of  civilization  everywhere,  as 
well  as  in  the  United  States,  has  become  involved  in  the  crisis.  Your 
war  is  not  only  against  bad  men,  but  bad  systems,  bad  legislation,  bad 
usages,  bad  education,  bad  opinions;  not,  as  some  have  misrepre- 
sented, against  constitutional  laws,  honest  contracts,  really  vested 
rights,  sound  morals,  order,  property,  or  religion, — but,  in  fine, 
against  abuses  and  errors  as  to  all  of  them. 

In  this  warfare,  unfortunately,  our  own  citizens  became  early  divided, 
and  have  since  presented  two  leading  parties.  The  contest  is,  there- 
fore, going  on  nominally  between  their  respective  men  and  their  imme- 
diate measures,  but  really  between  the  great  principles,  tendencies, 
and  results,  which  each  favors,  in  their  general  mode  of  thinking  and 
action. 

From  the  first,  we  had  the  misfortune  to  possess  statesmen  among  us 
who  aspired  more  to  independence  than  republicanism.  Rebels,  if 
you  please,  against  George  III.,  but  not  rebels  against  monarchy. 
Converts,  if  you  please,  to  revolution,  but  not  to  democracy.  They 
remained  the  worshippers  of  old  systems,  and  wedded  to  ancient  forms, 
and  distrusted  the  capacity  of  man  for  self-government.  It  is  not  to 
be  concealed  that  some  were  still  monarchists, —  doubtless  honest  mon- 
archists, but  still  monarchists.  Some  aristocrats,  and  honest,  but  still 
aristocrats.  Some  disciples  in  all  things  of  Alexander  Hamilton, — 
not  only  in  his  United  States  Bank  and  funding  system,  but  in  his 
high-toned  notions  of  government  and  society;  content  with  what 
existed,  rather  than  seeking  more ;  with  what  was  established,  rather 
than  urging  improvement ;  with  what  was  literary,  fashionable,  or 
savoring  of  good  society,  rather  than  aiming  to  instruct  better  and 
elevate  higher  the  masses ;  advocates  of  more  power  to  the  executive 
and  stronger  government,  instead  of  the  governed  being  more  intelli- 
gent and  privileged;  in  fine,  federalists  in  principle, — honest  federal- 
ists often,  but  still  federalists.  They  were  not  the  apostate,  bastard,  cor- 
rupt recreants  who  have  frequently,  for  the  loaves  and  fishes  of  office, 
— mere  plunder  and  pelf, — joined,  and  controlled,  and  disgraced  fed- 
eralism of  late  years.  No  !  They  were  sincere  followers  of  the  old 
school ;  and  highly  respectable  in  private  as  well  as  in  public  life,  for 
talents  and  virtue,  however  misled  and  dangerous  in  their  political 
opinions  in  a  republican  government. 

The  democratic  party,  on  the  other  hand,  have  felt  bound  from  the 
outset,  and  still  do,  to  oppose  such  unjust  theories,  and  such  a  sta- 
tionary policy,  as  well  as  measures  so  unequal.     In  short,  they  con- 


563 

sider  them  hostile  to  our  form  of  government,  and  the  true  spirit  of  our 
constitutions,  no  less  than  the  most  vital  interests  of  the  citizens  at 
large ;  and  also  as  behind  the  progress  of  the  age,  as  false  to  the  rights 
of  man,  as  opposed  to  the  spread  of  civilization,  and,  more  than  this, 
as  illiberal  and  anti- Christian  in  all  their  tendencies.  Such,  then,  is 
our  general  cause ;  such,  theirs.  Such  is  that  of  our  liberal  co-labor- 
ers throughout  the  world,  against  the  antagonist  party  under  every 
protean  shape  which  power  and  deception  can  devise. 

Formidable  even  here  as  our  opponents  are, — by  talents  and  wealth, 
— their  greater  success  elsewhere  renders  this  peculiarly  the  asylum 
and  the  citadel  of  free  principles  for  all  countries.  How  strongly, 
then,  does  it  behoove  us  at  all  times,  occasions,  and  points,  to  be  armed 
in  its  defence,  and  much  more  on  the  approach  of  our  elections  !  If 
the  elections  do  not,  in  each  case,  involve  all  of  the  points  of  difference, 
and  settle  for  any  great  length  of  time  many  of  the  momentous  ques- 
tions which  agitate  society,  they  always  operate  on  some  of  them. 
However  local  or  temporary  some  of  their  immediate  objects,  yet  the 
leading  men  infuse  into  them  forever  much  of  evil  or  good,  both  by 
example  and  precept,  as  well  as  opinion. 

The  great  cause  to  which  I  have  alluded  is  retarded  or  advanced,  to 
the  injury  or  benefit  of  untold  millions,  by  every  victory  or  defeat  of 
its  friends  at  the  polls,  on  a  scale  however  limited.  The  elections, 
also,  though  not  exactly  the  warfare  itself,  furnish  the  great  occasion 
for  ascertaining  its  results.  The  warfare  is  indeed  here  to-night ;  it 
is  everywhere,  and  during  the  whole  year.  It  is  in  the  counting- 
room,  the  street,  the  workshop,  the  field,  on  the  vessel's  deck;  but 
the  elections  are  the  places  and  the  times  for  a  final  reckoning.  They 
are  the  great  day  of  account,  if  they  are  not  the  battle-fields ;  and  if 
ballots  are  there  used  instead  of  bayonets,  they  give  us  the  numbers  on 
each  side,  and  the  killed,  and  wounded,  and  missing,  from  the  mental 
disputations  and  contests  which  have  preceded.  They  show  what 
has  been  effected  by  useful  hints  here,  by  exposing  misrepresentation 
there;  by  intrepid  appeals  to  duty  in  one  place,  intelligent  books 
and  independent  presses  in  another;  by  misrule  developed,  or  the 
detection  of  confidence  betrayed,  everywhere.  Before  they  take  place, 
we  contend  with  open  doors,  open  hearts,  and  open  principles ;  while 
our  enemies  have  fought  in  ambush,  and  still  rely  on  power  more 
than  right,  and  are  already  appalled  at  the  prospect.  Notwith- 
standing this,  it  becomes  us  all,  in  season  and  out  of  season,  to  keep 
our  lamps  trimmed  and  burning ;  and  though,  in  a  righteous  cause, 
always  trusting  in  Providence,  yet,  at  the  same  time,  always  taking 
special  care  to  keep  our  powder  dry  for  the  fight.  Use  no  meas- 
ures but  arguments, — no  influence  but  reason.  With  a  desperate 
foe,  never  sleep  but  on  your  arms.  Eternal  vigilance  has  more  than 
once  been  justly  called  the  price  of  liberty ;  and  well  have  you  illus- 
trated it  in  former  elections,  when,  after  years  of  hope  deferred,  you 
persevered  under  the  most  fearful  odds,  till  you  triumphed  by  a 


564  SPEECH   DELIVERED   IN   FANEUIL  HALL,  1841. 

single  vote.  All  you  need  now  is  the  same  resolute  perseverance  and 
undiminished  ardor,  with  the  same  steady,  inflexible,  trustworthy 
spirit,  to  insure  another  triumph  for  your  chief  candidate  in  the  field. 
You  do  not  belong  to  the  party  to  stay  beaten.  Morton  is  the  pilot, 
who,  I  trust,  will  again  weather  the  storm.  Why  should  he  not? 
What  is  there  in  the  present  crisis,  what  in  the  agitating  topics  of  the 
day,  what  in  all  that  is  daily  happening  around  us,  which  is  calcu- 
lated to  dishearten  ?  On  the  contrary,  we  have  quite  as  much  in  all 
these  to  encourage  us,  even  in  these  local  struggles,  as  we  have  in  the 
great  principles  of  public  liberty,  and  public  virtue,  and  public 
improvement,  which  distinguish  our  friends  and  their  cause  over  the 
whole  world. 

Some  twelve  months  ago,  to  be  sure,  we  witnessed  much  to  shake 
the  confidence  of  the  friends  of  equal  rights  in  their  security  and 
further  progress.  This  arose  not  merely  from  the  temporary  success 
of  our  opponents  in  the  last  presidential  election,  but  from  the  success 
of  such  bad  means  ;  means  so  much  worse  than  usual,  and  so  discred- 
itable to  their  authors,  and,  what  was  still  more  to  be  deplored,  so 
degrading  to  the  purity  and  stability  of  all  free  institutions. 

The  scenes  of  degradation  and  demoralization  which  preceded  that 
election  were  not  of  American  growth  ;  they  were  basely  foreign  in 
character.  They  must  have  been  imported  by  our  opponents  from 
countries  where  the  lower  ranks  are  ignorant  and  inexperienced,  and 
accustomed  to  debauchery,  and  where  votes  are  bought  and  sold  like 
sheep  in  the  shambles.  Their  influence  must  be  short-lived,  where 
intelligence  and  virtue  among  the  electors  are  not  utterly  extermi- 
nated. Never  can  results  thus  produced,  or  results  attempted  to  be 
perpetuated  by  means  such  as  those  proposed  at  the  late  extra  session, 
triumph  long  here.  Indeed,  it  is  a  part  of  the  providence  of  God 
everywhere,  that  unlawful  means  can  no  more  be  used  with  safety 
or  durable  success  than  unlawful  ends.  Hence  they  have,  in  this 
instance,  already  proved  the  seeds  of  overthrow  to  those  who  used 
them.  The  profligate  engineers  have  been  blown  sky-high  by  their 
own  shells.  The  revulsion  is  not  only  begun,  but  advanced.  The 
people  are  not  merely  awaking,  but  awakened.  And  overwhelming 
ruin  is  written  on  the  walls  of  the  political  palaces  of  our  opponents, 
in  warning  as  legible  and  deep  as  ever  dismayed  tyrants  in  days  of 
miraculous  interposition. 

Let  us  devote  a  few  moments  to  a  consideration  of  some  of  their 
means  and  measures,  as  a  memento  for  our  children  to  shun,  and  as 
an  excitement  for  us,  and  all  who  value  virtue  or  liberty,  to  punish 
such  outrages  on  them  at  the  polls,  in  the  eusuing  election,  by  the 
most  signal  reprobation. 

Look  first  at  some  of  the  reckless  charges  they  trumped  against  their 
predecessors.  In  the  front  rank  was  a  host  of  Ogle  fabrications  ; 
and,  what  was  worse,  after  being  proved  on  the  floor  of  Congress,  by 
one  of  his  own  political  friends,  even  by  one  of  your  own  ex-governors 


565 

and  present  collector,  to  be  full  of  exaggeration  and  hypocrisy,  thou- 
sands calling  themselves  honorable  men  aided  in  disseminating  those 
falsehoods  in  every  section  of  the  Union.  Next  came  the  convulsive 
horror  at  the  use  of  bloodhounds,  though  employed  to  detect  the  fero- 
cious savage,  who  had  spared  neither  sex  nor  infancy,  and  had  for 
years  covered  an  exposed  frontier  with  conflagration  and  butchery. 
But,  what  is  worse,  the  very  territorial  governor  who  recommended, 
bought,  and  used  them,  was  a  whig,  addressing  whig  conventions, 
and  has,  by  a  whig  administration,  been  reappointed  to  the  office  from 
which  the  abused  democratic  one  removed  him.  Next  came  the  really 
laughable  charge  of  usurpation  intended  by  a  standing  army  !  A 
standing  army,  composed  only  of  citizen  militia !  Yes,  a  citizen 
militia  converted  into  an  army  voluntarily  to  destroy  their  own  liber- 
ties, and  that  on  a  most  dangerous  plan,  it  was  pretended,  but  which 
had  its  origin  in  principle  under  Washington,  and  had  been  partic- 
ularly recommended  by  Harrison  himself.  Shame,  shame  on  such 
hypocrisy !  But,  perhaps,  enough  of  this  scrutiny.  Next,  then,  came 
the  charge  of  a  forty  million  debt !  Reiterated  over  the  whole  Union, 
and  yet  now  admitted  not  to  exceed  twelve  ;  and  half  of  that  twelve 
manifestly  caused  by  themselves.  This  was  done  by  them  in  only 
half  a  year,  and  near  sixteen  more  was  attempted  to  be  created  for  a 
national  bank,  while  their  predecessors  were  twenty-four  half-years  in 
forming  as  much  as  five  or  six  millions  ;  and,  in  the  mean  time,  saved 
and  deposited  with  the  States  near  thirty  millions,  though  their  suc- 
cessors have  not  deposited  a  dollar  with  them,  and  will  not,  without 
the  aid  of  increased  taxation.  Next  came  the  complaint  against  the 
use  of  treasury  notes,  which  saved  from  two  to  three  per  cent.,  on 
the  average,  compared  with  their  twelve  million  loan.  The  notes 
allowed  all  the  middling  classes  to  participate,  while  the  loan  benefits 
only  banks  and  nabob  capitalists  ;  and  the  notes,  however  derided,  did 
not,  on  the  4th  of  March  last,  equal  six  millions,  while  our  opponents 
have  since  authorized  loans  equalling  more  than  twenty-five  millions, 
and  resorted  to  treasury  notes  also,  whenever  able,  under  former 
laws. 

Next,  extravagance  of  expenditure,  being,  the  last  year,  but 
twenty-three  millions,  when  they  contemplate  twenty-seven  or  twenty- 
eight  this  year ;  being  larger  in  former  years  only  under  large 
expenses  in  Indian  wars,  and  uncalled  for  appropriations  for  other 
purposes  made  by  Congress,  to  the  extent  of  thirty  or  forty  millions. 
The  average  in  Mr.  Van  Buren's  administration  did  not  exceed 
twenty-seven  millions,  instead  of  thirty-seven,  as  pretended  often; 
and  his  last  year,  reduced  to  twenty-three  millions,  was  leading  the 
way  to  only  twenty  in  this  year,  that  being  only  the  amount  of  the 
average  ordinary  expenditure  of  the  whole  last  twelve  years,  pro- 
nounced so  extravagant  by  those  who  have  exceeded  it  seven  or  eight 
millions.  I  ought  to  pass  over  other  topics  of  their  groundless  charges, 
lest  too  great  an  encroachment  should  be  made  on  your  time. 
48 


566 

Look  at  the  losses  by  receivers,  collectors,  &c,  so  falsely  presented 
and  exaggerated.  A  list  of  the  whole,  from  the  foundation  of  the  gov- 
ernment, during  half  a  century,  has  been  circulated  and  placarded  by 
these  honest  politicians  on  every  post  and  corner,  as  the  amount  lost 
during  only  the  twelve  past  years  of  democratic  rule.  Much  of  it  has 
also  been  attributed  to  the  sub-treasury  system ;  when,  in  truth,  the 
losses  have  not  been  a  single  dollar  under  the  sub-treasury,  and  when 
its  whole  expenses  yearly  do  not  appear  to  have  equalled  thirty  thou- 
sand dollars ;  when  all  the  losses  by  collectors  and  receivers  under 
General  Jackson  were  not  as  much  as  in  various  former  administra- 
tions, with  a  United  States  Bank,  or  as  the  losses  yet  unsettled  to  the 
treasury  by  the  United  States  Bank  alone ;  and  when  all  the  losses 
under  Mr.  Van  Buren  (including  Swartwout  himself,  recommended 
to  office  at  his  second  term  by  whigs,  voted  for  by  whigs,  chairman 
of  the  panic  whigs,  and  once  nominated  as  a  candidate  for  Vice-presi- 
dent by  whigs),  not  all  equal  to  the  losses  in  the  last  four  years,  in 
more  than  twenty  cases  of  broken  banks ;  nor  one-twentieth  of  the 
amount  lost  by  the  public  and  its  stockholders,  through  the  United 
States  Bank  alone.  Even  now,  after  all  the  tirades  against  the  last 
administration  on  account  of  Swartwout' s  default,  we  are  told  by  the 
very  last  whig  papers  themselves,  that  all  the  vituperation  has  been 
groundless,  the  defalcation  trifling,  and  the  whole  well  secured.  In 
fine,  without  being  too  tedious,  the  past  administrations  were  falsely 
charged  with  ruin,  ruin,  general  KUIN,  every  year  since  General 
Jackson's  election,  as  well  as  since  Mr.  Van  Buren' s.  Ruin,  from 
imputed  harshness  to  the  Indians  in  Georgia,  where  civilization  and 
Christianity  were  only  then  attempted  to  be  extended ;  ruin,  from 
the  veto  of  the  bank  in  1832,  which  veto  their  own  President  has 
repeated  in  1841;  ruin,  from  the  removal  of  the  deposites,  which 
the  law  expressly  authorized,  and  from  an  institution  that  has  since 
failed,  and  been  pronounced,  even  by  some  of  the  whig  partisans,  a 
public  nuisance. 

But  enough  of  charges  so  groundless  and  absurd.  "Well  calculated, 
to  be  sure,  to  mislead  for  a  time ;  but  yet,  after  detection  and  full 
exposure,  calculated  also  to  recoil,  and  overwhelm,  as  they  are  now 
doing,  with  shame,  desertion,  and  defeat,  their  heedless  authors. 

Look  next  a  moment  at  the  reprobate  character  of  the  other  prac- 
tices and  principles  under  which  they  sought  and  procured  power. 
Their  course,  as  a  party,  was  to  promise  nothing,  but  abuse  every- 
thing. At  the  same  time,  fragments  of  the  party,  in  particular  places, 
promised  everything,  and  in  others  resisted  everything.  In  one  place  the 
fragments  were  United  States  Bank,  in  another  anti-bank ;  in  one  high 
tariff,  in  another  anti-tariff;  in  one  abolition,  in  another  anti-abolition ; 
in  one  pledging  all  offices  to  old  incumbents,  in  another  all  to  new  ones. 

But,  as  a  party,  and  a  whole  party,  when  asked  for  their  joint  com- 
mon principles  for  administering  the  government,  they  referred  you  to 
nothing,  but  their  philosophical  and  argumentative  coon-skins  and 


SPEECH   DELIVERED   IN   FANEUIL   HALL,  1841.  567 

hard  cider.  If  you  inquired  for  their  plans  of  reform,  you  were 
answered  only  by  log  cabins  or  gold  spoons.  In  fine,  the  loftiest 
among  them  admitted  that  their  resolution  was  to  oppose  everything 
and  propose  nothing. 

Even  at  Harrisburg,  where  the  magnates  of  their  cause  assembled, 
you  could  obtain  no  opinions  on  the  constitution,  the  currency,  the 
distribution, — much  less  abolition,  or  the  United  States  Bank.  All  was 
concealment,  noncommittalism,  inglorious  secrecy, —  nothing,  in  short, 
about  any  great  principle,  or  question  of  constitutional  liberty,  or  pub- 
lic policy,  but  simply  "  Tippecanoe  and  Tyler  too." 

It  was  "Tippecanoe  and  Tyler  too"  morning,  noon,  and  night, 
at  taverns,  pipe-layings,  log-cabins,  halls  of  legislation,  and,  if  not  in 
churches,  at  least  in  aristocratic  drawing-rooms.  It  was  the  league 
of  black  spirits  and  white,  of  all  hues,  opinions  and  creeds ;  and  all  not 
for  one  single  great  specified  object,  except  '•Tippecanoe  and  Tyler 
too  ; "  and  that  to  be  attained  through  all  kinds  of  misrepresentation 
and  delusion,  all  kinds  of  mummery  and  parade,  all  kinds  of  sensual 
and  sordid  appeals ;  indeed,  all  kinds  of  political  debauchery,  from 
treating  down  to  Badgerism  and  Glentworthism ;  and  all  kinds  of 
inconsistency,  from  running  two  candidates  to  establish  a  Bank  of  the 
United  States  who  had  both  uniformly  opposed  it,  and  two  to  enable 
them  to  seize  on  all  the  spoils  of  office  who  had  uniformly  denounced 
those  spoils,  and  all  removals  for  opinion's  sake. 

What  could  common-sense,  philosophy  or  cool  reflection,  anticipate 
to  happen,  ere  long,  when  the  mask  was  stripped  off  from  such  a  chaos 
and  profligacy  of  principles  1  Nothing  less  than  what  experience  soon 
verified.  Those  who  sow  the  wind  must  expect  to  reap  the  whirlwind. 
The  end,  in  one  sense,  came  more  quickly  than  any  anticipated,  —  in 
less  than  one  short  month. 

In  less  than  one  short  month, —  ere  the  baked  meats  of  the  inaugu^ 
ration,  with  all  its  senseless  pageantry  and  "glorification,"  were  cold, 
—  they  had  falsified  most  of  their  pledges  against  removals,  and  by 
importunities  and  bickerings  not  only  embittered  the  life,  but  hurried 
to  a  painful  grave  the  gray  hairs  of  their  chief  magistrate. 

It  is  a  singular  coincidence,  that  the  cold-blooded  persecutors  for 
the  spoils  of  office  were  allowing  the  timbers  of  the  last  log-cabin  in 
the  capital,  the  great  emblem  of  their  cause,  to  be  pulled  down  and 
trodden  in  the  dust  beside  his  ashes,  when  these  last  were  being  con- 
veyed from  the  city. 

What  has  been  the  fate  also  of  his  colleague,  of  "Tyler  too"  before 
the  first  half-year  of  his  Presidency  closed  1  Burnt  and  shot  in  effigy 
over  half  the  Union,  denounced  in  their  conventions,  black-balled  by 
their  presses,  and,  in  fine,  proscribed  in  Congress  itself  by  all  the  great 
leaders  of  the  great  Harrisburg  piebald  coalition. 

What  sudden  retribution !  What  changes  beyond  the  romance  of 
the  wildest  Arabian  tale  !  What  a  stupendous  coalition  sapped  by  its 
own  bad  principles  —  overthrown  —  scattered  in  fragments  over  the 


568  SPEECH   DELIVERED   IN  FANEUIL   HALL;  1841. 

earth,  in  only  half  a  year !  It  was  almost  miraculous  madness,  which 
led  them  to  persevere,  as  they  began,  in  such  a  universal  disregard 
for  all  then  solemn  pledges  against  removals  for  mere  opinion's  sake, 
—  pledges  given  everywhere  and  in  every  form,  and  by  almost  every 
conspicuous  politician.  In  this  matter  their  wantonness  almost  exceeds 
credibility.  Did  they  suppose  the  whole  community  had  adopted  a 
Paul  Clifford  rule  of  conduct  and  belief  1  Did  they  suppose  that  the 
people  at  large  had  neither  memories  nor  morals  1  Is  breach  of  faith 
to  be  a  part  of  the  creed  of  our  opponents  1  Can  they  regard  hypoc- 
risy as  a  virtue?- — violation  of  pledges  as  honorable?  Did  they 
expect  to  retain  public  confidence  by  breaking  it,  and  to  deserve  future 
trust  by  a  profligate  abuse  of  all  past  trust  ?  If  they  did,  it  is  for- 
tunate that  the  false  disguise  has  been  stripped  off  so  early,  and  that 
they  now  stand  unwhigged  before  the  scorn  of  many  of  their  own 
party,  and  the  jeers  of  the  world. 

They  have  been  equally  unfortunate,  if  not  perfidious,  in  several 
other  respects.  Thus,  on  the  great  and  absorbing  question  of  the 
currency,  they  have  accomplished  little  or  nothing,  except  to  get  up  a 
malignant  family  feud.  Their  magnificent  doings  have  been  chiefly 
undoings.  The  deposite  act,  as  to  the  pet  banks,  which  they  had 
insisted  on  as  indispensable  to  prevent  a  despotic  union  of  the  purse 
and  the  sword,  and  to  control  a  dangerous  executive  discretion,  they 
have  repealed  in  hot  haste,  before  any  system  had  become  a  law  in 
its  stead ;  thus,  by  blunder  or  design,  restoring  under  themselves  the 
very  condition  of  things  they  had  anathematized  under  others.  Not 
content  with  this,  they  committed  the  like  folly  as  to  the  sub-treasury, 
though  so  excellent  in  some  of  its  provisions  as  to  force  on  themselves 
a  renewal  of  them ;  and  so  wise  in  all  its  essentials,  tha,t  no  constitu- 
tional, safe,  and  permanent  substitute  is  very  likely  to  be  devised  for 
it,  except  with  some  modifications  as  to  the  currency  originally  recom- 
mended with  it  in  September,  1837.  Indeed,  the  great  whig  argument 
against  it,  that  a  verdict  had,  by  the  former  elections,  been  rendered 
against  it,  has  already  been  nullified,  and  the  hundred  thousand  changes 
of  votes  already  ascertained  since  last  autumn,  and,  indeed,  since  its 
repeal,  furnish  the  strongest  whig  argument  to  restore  it,  and  to  drive 
the  advocates  of  a  national  bank  into  more  than  Andalusian  shades. 

How  ludicrous  has  been  their  tinkering  with  this  subject  at  the  late 
extra  session,  till  they  fell  together  by  the  tongues, —  not  to  say  ears, 
as  in  one  House  of  Congress, —  and  then,  like  termagants,  broke  up 
with  a  regular  row  of  caucus-scolding ! 

Instead  of  confining  banking  to  those  who  have  spare  funds  to  loan, 
they  tried  to  dabble  in  it  themselves,  though  without  spare  money,  and 
compelled  to  resort  to  an  immense  debt  to  be  embarked  in  so  unprom- 
ising a  speculation.  Instead  of  providing  capital  for  commerce,  where 
a  sufficiency  did  not  exist,  they  sought  to  swell  the  amount  of  what 
was  already  over-bloated,  excessive,  and  unprofitable.  Instead  of 
reducing,  by  their  system,  executive  influence,  they  increased  it  ten- 


SPEECH   DELIVERED   IN   FANEUIL   HALL,  1841.  569 

fold.  Instead  of  letting  the  government  keep  its  own  money,  as  it 
keeps  its  own  ships,  forts,  lands,  and  buildings,  by  its  own  officers, 
amenable  to  it  and  accountable  for  defalcation  under  severe  penalties, 
they  attempted  to  put  it  in  the  power  of  bank  stockholders, —  at  times, 
titled,  inimical,  and  irresponsible  foreigners, —  such  as  some  Countess 
of  Paper-rags,  some  Duke  of  Shinplasters,  or  the  Barings,  or  even 
Louis  Philippe.  Instead  of  leaving  substitutes  for  specie  to  the  States, 
that  may  need  them,  and  who  can,  by  only  willing  it,  at  any  time, 
make  them  sound,  they  have  sought  to  absorb  the  whole  subject  of 
the  currency  into  the  hands  of  mere  jobbing  politicians.  Under  pre- 
tence of  doing  some  small  exchanges  for  themselves,  they  have  argued 
the  power  to  do  all  exchanges  for  others ;  and  they  have  thus  attempted 
to  regulate,  cheapen,  and  equalize,  the  whole  exchanges  of  the  country, 
amounting  to  several  hundred  millions,  by  legislative  corporations,  when 
they  might  as  well  regulate  and  reduce  the  tides  of  the  ocean  by  such 
corporations.  They  might  as  well  control  prices  of  merchandise  and 
produce,  and  fix  new  regulations  for  the  movements  of  even  the  plan- 
etary system,  as  alter  by  legislation  the  great  laws  of  trade  that  per- 
vade and  govern  the  whole  civilized  world. 

The  real  difference  of  exchanges  between  two  places,  you  know  full 
well,  cannot  exceed  the  cost  of  carrying  specie  from  one  to  the  other  ; 
or  else  specie  would  be  carried,  instead  of  buying  a  bill  of  exchange. 
Now  you  know,  also,  that  the  cost  of  carrying  gold  from  the  remotest 
points,  St.  Louis  or  Detroit,  does  not  exceed  two  per  cent.  Hence  it 
follows,  inevitably,  that  all  the  party  slang  as  to  high  exchanges,  with- 
out a  national  bank,  is  groundless  ;  and  that  what  trading  politicians 
please  to  designate  as  five,  ten,  or  fifteen  per  cent.,  as  a  difference  in 
exchanges,  is  not  a  difference  between  exchange  of  specie,  but  of  specie 
in  one  place  and  bad  notes  in  another.  Such  a  difference  they  might 
find  across  one  of  your  own  streets,  between  the  exchange  of  specie  for 
the  notes  of  a  broken  bank.  You  might  as  well  call  the  difference 
between  the  exchange  of  a  sound  horse  for  an  unsound  one,  in  differ- 
ent cities,  a  difference  caused  by  their  distance  from  each  other,  rather 
than  by  their  unsoundness. 

Only  last  winter  (to  give  a  practical  illustration  on  this  point), 
when  exchanges  were  quoted,  by  political  presses  and  bankers,  as  from 
three  to  five  per  cent,  'on  New  Orleans,  I  exchanged  two  hundred 
thousand  dollars  of  specie  in  New  Orleans  for  the  same  amount  paid 
me  at  New  York,  without  paying  a  single  dollar  for  the  difference  in 
exchange. 

Nothing  can  cure  such  ignorant  or  speculating  interference,  but 
some  little  acquaintance  with  the  true  principles  of  banking  and  of 
commerce,  and  some  restraining  grace  in  politicians  not  to  make  the 
public  the  goose  to  be  exposed  to  be  constantly  plucked  by  a  combina- 
tion of  speculators,  sharks,  and  blacklegs.  Had  neither  of  the  bank 
projects  been  vetoed,  those  miserable  schemes  would  both  have  fallen 
still  lower,  except  for  the  public  capital  and  credit  connected  with  them ; 
48* 


570 

and  Captain  Tyler,  as  well  as  the  constitution,  would  botli  have  been 
headed  in  vain ;  and  the  public  would,  in  my  opinion,  soon  have  been 
more  thoroughly  undeceived  than  they  even  now  are,  as  to  the  folly 
and  imposture  of  both  measures.  The  people  can  always  have  specie, 
or  its  equivalent,  when  they  insist  upon  it ;  and,  whether  they  resort 
to  a  Macon  specific,  or  hard  money  alone,  as  provided  by  the  consti- 
tution, the  fault  is  in  themselves,  in  not  having  good  laws,  or  in  not 
inflexibly  requiring  them  to  be  executed,  when  they  are  subjected  to 
the  miserable  vacillations  and  depreciations  of  suspended  bank-paper. 
The  axe  can  be  laid  at  the  root  of  speculation  and  profit ;  and  sound 
money  will  abound  as  much  as  sound  timber  or  sound  ships,  if  the 
demand  for  them  is  only  made  steady  and  firm.  The  stupid  idea  that 
coin  enough,  if  required,  does  not  exist  in  the  world  for  a  circulating 
medium  of  specie  here,  when  it  exceeds  in  America  and  Europe  alone 
fifteen  times  all  needed  here,  is  worthy  only  of  the  superficial  flippancy 
that  gives  birth  to  such  crudities.  The  specie  flag,  kept  flying  by  the 
General  Government  in  183T,  saved  to  us  specie  enough  for  three- 
fourths  of  the  whole  amount  desirable,  and  relieved  the  country  from 
the  abominable  twenty-five  years'  suspension  looked  up  to  by  Mr. 
Biddle  as  the  English  model  for  our  imitation, —  one  of  the  conse- 
quences of  which  has  been  developed  in  the  rotten  insolvency  and  ruin 
of  the  United  States  Bank  under  his  boasted  auspices. 

I  would  fain  pursue  this  subject  further,  did  time  permit,  without 
wearying  your  patience,  and  encroaching  on  ground  allotted  to  others. 
A  word  or  two  as  to  some  of  the  other  measures,  and  I  have  done.  It 
may  suffice  to  remark,  as  to  most  of  them,  that;  they  were  in  close  keeping 
with  the  contempt  of  public  decency  and  public  pledges,  as  well  as  the 
disregard  of  democratic  principles,  which  have  already  been  exposed  in 
the  others.  On  this  allegation,  we  are  ready  to  meet  them  every- 
where. On  this,  especially,  do  we  choose  to  meet  them  at  Philippi  — 
at  the  polls.  They  have  been  met  in  it  there  already,  by  a  once 
deceived  and  now  indignant  people,  in  many  of  the  States.  The 
hour  of  meeting  and  of  reckoning  here  approaches.  You  have  made 
up  your  minds,  I  trust,  unchangeably,  on  several  of  the  other  points 
in  their  public  career ;  and  I  will  now  briefly,  but  plainly,  openly,  inde- 
pendently, boldly,  tell  them  beforehand  what,  in  my  opinion,  they  are, 
and  what  such  unfaithful  stewards  must  expect  from  your  ballot-boxes, 
First,  you  will  not  countenance  public  perfidy.  No  matter  whether  in 
false  accusations  against  former  rulers,  or  broken  promises  as  to  proscrip- 
tion, and,  above  all,  to  retrenchment  and  reform.  Next,  you  will  not 
tolerate  succumbing  or  truckling  to  foreign  powers,  and  more  especially 
our  ancient  oppressors.  No  hasty  willingness  to  surrender  supposed 
offenders  without  either  trial,  indemnity,  or  even  apology,  and  no  defer- 
ring to  take  possession  of  the  disputed  territory  on  the  next  4th  of 
July,  as  promised,  to  the  next,  the  next,  and  we  fear  the  next 
onward,  till  the  "last  syllable  of  recorded  time."  Massachusetts,  as 
well  as  Maine,  has  a  deep  interest  in  this  question.     We  want  peace, 


SPEECH   DELIVERED   IN   FANEUIL  HALL,  1841.  571 

but  we  do  not  want  dishonor ;  and  it  is  not,  and  must  not  be  in  the 
true  American  heart  or  nerve,  ever  to  prove  craven,  or  unfaithful,  to 
either  national  rights  or  national  honor.  Next,  you  will  never  endure 
that  the  public  domain  be  squandered,  and  its  place  supplied  by  per- 
manent loans,  or  augmented  taxes.  The  government,  as  a  whole,  has 
been  plundered  of  its  principalities,  large  as  half  the  size  of  Europe. 

Remember  that  there  is  no  surplus,  and  that  every  dollar  of  our 
public  territory  given  away  has  to  be  supplied  by  more  than  a  dol- 
lar's tax;  and  that  Massachusetts,  for  instance,  in  getting  $140,000 
by  the  distribution  law,  has  to  repay,  under  an  increased  tariff,  quite 
$180,000  to  restore  the  principal,  and  the  expense,  as  well  as  loss,  of 
collection  and  transfer.  Remember,  too,  that  the  poor  and  middling 
classes  are  obliged  to  pay  of  this  $180,000  at  least  twenty  or  thirty 
per  cent,  more  under  a  tariff  than  they  would  have  to  pay  if  the  money 
was  wanted  by  Massachusetts,  and  collected  by  herself  under  her  own 
system  of  taxation,  which  properly  falls  heaviest  on  capital,  and  less 
on  labor  than  does  the  tariff.  Remember,  too,  that  these  losses  are 
inflicted  on  us  so  as  in  effect  only  to  aid  British  bond-holders  abroad, 
and  wealthy  political  jobbers  at  home.  Next,  you  will  support  no 
wasteful  addition  to  the  public  expenditure,  which,  at  only  the  extra 
session,  our  opponents  have  augmented  nearly  six  millions,  by  such 
unprecedented  schemes,  among  others,  as  granting  civil  pensions, 
assuming  naval  pensions,  assuming  post-office  expenses,  and  assuming 
the  support  of  lunatic  paupers.  Nor  will  you  tolerate  any  star-cham- 
ber inquiries,  with  secret  and  inquisitorial  powers,  to  hunt  down  political 
opponents,  and  provide  for  starving  office-seekers. 

Tell  them,  too,  you  want  no  Biddle  bank,  coiling,  like  a  huge  sea- 
serpent,  its  leviathan  folds  around  every  antagonist  interest  or  institu- 
tion, and  strangling  its  victims  at  the  nod  of  party  caprice,  or  party 
dictation,  on  either  side  of  the  Atlantic.  Tell  them  to  keep  off  pro- 
fane hands  from  destroying  the  veto  power  in  the  constitution,  which 
they  threaten.  It  is  the  people's  tribunative  prerogative,  speaking 
again  through  their  executive.  And  if  the  popular  voice  is  to  vote, 
independent  of  the  forms  of  the  constitution,  as  they  argue  against  the 
use  of  the  veto  power,  then  all  of  them  and  their  schemes  are  already 
check-mated  and  overruled.  If  half  of  those  in  either  House  resigned 
who  are  now  in  a  minority  at  home,  the  gasconading  grandeur  of  the 
administration,  last  March,  or  even  last  June,  would  become  a  mere 
worthless  hulk. 

Nor  will  you  tolerate  any  useless  increase  of  taxation  or  national 
debt.  The  latter  you  never  believed  to  be  a  national  blessing,  but  a 
curse  in  time  of  peace ;  and  the  former  is  utterly  indefensible,  whether 
it  equal  only  the  old  tory  tax  of  threepence  a  pound  on  tea,  which 
goaded  your  fathers  into  revolution,  or  whether  it  keep  up  on  most  of 
the  great  necessaries  of  life  double  the  odious  tithes,  from  the  oppres- 
sion of  which  they  once  fled  to  this  iron-bound  coast  and  to  a  savage 
wilderness. 


572  SPEECH   DELIVERED   IN   FANEUIL   HALL.  1841. 

It  has  been  reiterated,  as  a  matter  of  taunt,  that  even  I,  on  whose 
motion  tea  and  coffee  have  been  exempted  from  taxation,  was  once  of  a 
different  opinion.  This  is  of  a  piece  with  many  other  calumnies 
and  misrepresentations  of  the  day.  To  be  sure,  I  once  said  that, 
if  the  imports  continued  small  as  in  1838,  and  if  the  public  expenses 
were  kept  high,  or  not  reduced,  it  would  be  necessary  either  to  violate 
the  compromise,  limiting  all  duties  to  twenty  per  cent.,  or  impose 
duties  on  coffee  and  tea.  But  I  said  at  the  same  time,  and  have  a 
thousand  times  repeated  it,  that  not  only  would  the  imports  be  mate- 
rially larger,  but  the  public  expenses  should  be  reduced,  and  then  that 
several  articles  might  be  exempted,  including  coffee  and  tea ;  and 
accordingly  I  moved  to  have  them  exempted,  and,  thanks  to  Provi- 
dence, they  are  free ! 

But  still  our  foes  compel  the  people,  by  a  needless  tariff,  to  pay 
three  millions  more  within  the  Union  than  they  would  be  obliged  to 
pay  without  the  boasted  distribution  bill  of  the  last  session.  Thus  are 
we  ground  down  with  a  tax  on  our  clothes  and  our  leather ;  our  salt 
and  molasses ;  our  sugar  and  iron;  — indeed,  much  of  all,  besides  tea 
and  coffee,  which  we  either  see  or  taste,  wear  or  use,  except  the  drugs 
and  poisons  to  kill  us. 

If  we  live  or  die,  ride  or  walk,  marry  or  be  single,  remain  poor  or 
rich, —  still,  in  some  shape  or  other,  from  the  cradle  to  the  grave,  tax- 
ation under  the  present  tariff,  like  cankered  care,  stalks  beside  or 
around  us,  as  inseparable  as  our  shadows.  On  the  contrary,  we  want 
industry  and  enterprise  to  be  free, —  "  free  trade  and  sailors'  rights," 
all  the  world  over.  We  want  the  just  reward  everywhere  and  in  every- 
thing of  honest  labor.  We  are  not  foes  to  manufactures,  any  more 
than  to  agriculture  or  commerce.  But  we  say,  let  all  have  equal 
rights, —  let  all  have  a  fair  field  and  a  clear  deck.  Is  not  tilling  the 
soil,  or  ploughing  the  ocean,  as  much  American  industry  as  moving  a 
spinning-jenny?  Are  not  all  the  toils  and  mechanical  arts  con- 
nected with  farming  and  trade  useful  and  commendable,  and  to  be 
encouraged,  as  much  as  weaving  or  spooling  ?  We  want  no  hot-bed 
protection  in  either,  to  disturb  capital  from  its  natural  channels,  or  to 
make  the  rich  richer  and  the  poor  poorer.  On  the  contrary,  give  us 
equal  liberty  in  all.  Last,  but  not  least,  you  never  will  countenance 
any  marked  hostility  to  the  laboring  classes,  in  any  form, —  much  less 
by  annulling  the  salutary  ten-hour  system,  or  capriciously  lowering 
wages.  We  are  all,  it  is  hoped,  practical  as  well  as  theoretical  demo- 
crats.    We  go  for  substance,  more  than  names. 

We  care  not  for  claims  to  democracy,  whether  under  an  October  sun 
or  an  October  moon,  set  up  by  those  who  have  long  reviled  Jefferson 
and  Madison,  the  fathers  of  our  democratic  faith.  Let  us  have  deeds, 
rather  than  words.  If  such  pretenders  are  democrats,  those  fathers 
were  not,  and  we  are  not.  Let  us  not  trust  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence and  the  constitution,  as  well  as  the  resolutions  of  ?98,  to  be 
construed  and  enforced  for  us  by  those  who  advocated  the  alien  and 


SPEECH   DELIVERED   IN   FANEUIL   HALL,  1841.  573 

sedition  laws,  reproached  Mr.  Madison  as  deserving  a  halter,  denounced 
Jefferson  asunder  French  influence,  and  supported,  in  1832,  '39,  and 
particularly  in  '41,  United  States  Banks,  as  well  as  gag-rules  and 
gag-laws.  Thank  God,  all  this  kind  of  masquerade  humbug  is  coming 
to  the  light !  The  bubble  has  been  pricked  — burst.  The  promises  and 
pledges  before  the  election  have  been  openly  violated.  Tell  them  to 
change  creeds,  or  not  to  change  names.  The  democratic  church  is  lib- 
eral, but  she  wants  converts,  not  spies.  The  relief  which  was  to  come 
from  our  opponents  proves  in  the  end  to  be  oppression.  The  economy 
expected  turns  out  to  be  extravagance.  The  time  for  their  retrench- 
ment is  never  the  present  time,  but  always  to-morrow,  and  to-morrow, 
and  to-morrow.  The  reduction  promised  in  expenses  is  augmenta- 
tion, by  millions.  The  better  times  which  were  to  refresh  and  enrich  all 
classes  have  proved  the  worst  —  except  the  gradual  cure  which  increased 
industry  and  thrift  will  alone  in  time  produce,  and  which  intermeddling 
legislation  often  retards.  The  true  bone  and  muscle  of  the  land, 
whether  merchants,  mechanics,  or  farmers,  seamen  or  laborers, — 
whether  heretofore  under  the  whig  or  democratic  flag, —  are  tired  of 
this  wretched  system  of  change,  pretension,  and  hypocrisy.  I  con- 
cede cheerfully  that  members  nominally  in  the  ranks  of  our  opponents 
are  men  of  private  worth,  and  are  kept  from  our  ranks  only  by  preju- 
dice, indifference,  or  delusion,  on  political  topics.  Their  reason  and 
conscience  often  approve  our  general  principles,  while  their  habits,  and 
associations,  and  timidity,  disarm  them.  I  war  not  with  such,  nor 
impugn  their  motives.  I  only  invoke  them  to  exercise  courage,  as  well 
as  inquiry, —  alter  their  views,  when  found  untenable,  as  virtuous  cit- 
izens and  real  patriots  should, —  and  then  perform  their  duty  like  the 
sons  of  noble  sires,  who  scented  tyranny  in  the  breeze,  and  many  of 
whom  died  martyrs  in  the  holy  cause  of  liberty.  The  whole  country 
around  them  is  becoming  watchful  and  indignant.  Every  quarter  is 
loud  with  scorn  at  the  impositions  which  have  been  practised, —  burn- 
ing with  the  cry  of  shame  on  such  moral  outrages, —  ardent  to  avenge 
on  their  betrayers  unfaithfulness,  insults,  and  injuries.  The  ball  has 
recoiled.  We  are,  to  use  the  old  language  of  our  opponents,  in  the 
midst  of  a  revolution.  And  let  me  congratulate  you  that  never 
shone  out  brighter  omens,  or  in  a  brighter  sky,  than  now  appear  to 
invite  Massachusetts  to  join  the  bright  galaxy  of  republican  States. 

This  is  not  declamation,  or  round  assertion  for  the  occasion;  for  more 
than  one  hundred  thousand  voters  from  our  opponents'  ranks  have 
already  joined  ours,  or  refused  longer  to  act  with  theirs.  States,  too, 
large  as  well  as  small,  have  spoken  loudly,  and  invite  you  earnestly  by 
their  glorious  example. 

Scarcely  had  the  present  administration  finished  the  carousals  and 
gaudy  pageantry  of  the  inauguration,  when  the  cloven  foot  of  their 
course  became  so  apparent,  that  New  Hampshire  opened  the  spring 
elections  with  an  increase  of  her  six  thousand  against  them  to  eight. 
Permit  me,  one  of  her  grateful  sons, —  so  numerous  on  earth  and  ocean, 


574 

in  the  sunny  south  and  mighty  west,  —  to  express  for  that  first  noble 
rebuke  of  whig  misrule  my  thankfulness.  No  less  do  I  express  it 
in  her  behalf  for  the  kindness  evinced  this  night  towards  her  and  hers, 
by  you  and  the  eloquent  speaker  who  preceded  me.  She,  I  can  assure 
you,  showed  the  same  granite  firmness  in  the  Revolution  as  now, — 
proved  herself  to  be  equally  granite  in  the  last  war,  however  overborne 
for  a  season, —  granite  in  the  struggles  of  the  last  ten  years,  and 
granite  will  you  find  her  forever. 

Next  came  Indiana,  though  their  favorite  State,  rushing  against 
them  like  a  cataract. 

Next,  faithful  Alabama,  whose  high  praise  is  to  be  the  New  Hamp- 
shire of  the  south. 

Next,  Tennessee,  changing  at  once  from  them  over  seven  thousand 
votes,  and  thus  gladdening  the  venerable  hero's  last  days,  who  looks 
from  her  Hermitage  with  a  still  anxious  eye  for  his  country's  welfare. 

Next,  Vermont  came,  like  an  avalanche  from  her  Green  Mountains. 
Next,  Maine, —  now  the  bright  particular  star  in  the  east,  sweeping 
all  the  tribes  of  whiggery  before  her  like  the  tides  in  her  vast  bays. 
Next,  Maryland,  with  almost  an  entire  revolution,  under  the  very 
eaves  of  the  palace  at  Washington.  Next,  Georgia,  speaking  as  the 
winds  come  when  forests  are  rended.  Next,  Pennsylvania,  once 
more  to  be  the  keystone  of  the  arch.  Next,  is  Ohio,  coming  as  the 
waves  come  when  navies  are  stranded.  And  New  York  will  be 
most  trumpet-tongued.  And  shall  not  Massachusetts  rise  also  in  her 
might,  and  take  her  old  lofty  position  among  the  stars  which  shine  in 
the  democratic  galaxy  1  Forbid  her  absence,  ye  sterling  souls,  whose 
energies  and  labors  have  done  so  much,  and  who  are  so  well  equal  to 
the  task  of  doing  so  much  more !  Forbid  it,  above  all,  that  spirit,  that 
redeeming  spirit,  which  alone  has  improved  our  race  in  every  age  and 
crisis,  and  which  led  Luther,  in  the  cause  of  duty  and  reform,  to  say 
he  would  move  onward  in  their  cause,  though  obstructed  in  his  faith 
even  by  devils  themselves,  as  thick  as  the  tiles  on  the  roofs  of  the 
houses  !  "Now,  then,  is  the  day,  and  now  the  hour,"  to  plant  your 
foot  once  more  on  the  neck  of  the  federal  tyrant ;  and,  if  once  more, 
it  will  be.  God  willing,  henceforth  and  forever. 


ORATION   AT   PORTSMOUTH.  575 


ORATION  AT  PORTSMOUTH.* 


My  Fellow-citizens: — You  do  well  to  unite  with  millions  of  our 
countrymen  in  celebrating  this  eventful  day.  Its  fires  should  be  kept 
alive  forever,  with  more  than  vestal  vigilance,  because  it  is  the  anni- 
versary of  a  nation's  birth,  and  the  great  jubilee  of  American  inde- 
pendence. For  this  reason  I  have  always  been  willing  to  take  a  part, 
however  humble,  in  trying  to  make  the  occasion  memorable,  joyful, 
and  glorious.  And  for  such  a  purpose,  in  compliance  with  a  request 
from  our  city  authorities,  I  come  before  you  now  to  submit  some 
views  connected  with  the  Revolution,  which,  on  this  day  seventy-four 
years  ago,  secured  to  us  the  sovereign  station  and  rights  of  a  free 
people. 

Considering  my  present  official  position, — withdrawn,  in  some  degree, 
from  the  stormy  politics  of  the  day, — and  considering  more  particularly 
your  position,  —  having  met  together  without  distinction  of  party, —  I 
deem  it  just  and  respectful  to  avoid  all  mere  party  topics.  It  is  true 
that  parties  in  a  republic  are  often  evidences  of  freedom  and  independ- 
ence of  opinion,  and  are  often  efficient  checks  on  each  other's  tenden- 
cies to  abuse  of  power ;  yet  it  certainly  augurs  well  if,  at  any  time,  all 
can  meet  on  one  common  platform,  and  let  one  pulse  beat  through  every 
heart.  Most  assuredly  is  it  auspicious  to  our  unity  and  energy  of 
action  in  times  of  peril,  if,  on  this  proudest  festival  among  Americans, 
we  are  willing  temporarily  to  forget  and  forgive  collisions,  and  extend 
to  each  other  the  olive-branch,  rather  than  the  arrow. 

Without  indulging,  then,  in  any  of  the  spicy  or  fearful  and  exciting 
topics  of  the  day,  there  seem  to  me  some  points  of  opinion  common  to 
us  all  in  relation  to  the  excellences  and  glories  of  the  independence  we 
celebrate. 

One  of  those  points  is  the  great  importance  of  that  event.  On  that 
account,  inspired  by  one  common  gratitude,  we  all  join  heart  and 
tongue  in  one  chorus  of  thanksgiving  to  the  statesmen  and  patriots 
and  heroes  who  won  our  hallowed  independence.  They  established 
among  us  its  immortal  principles,  we  hope,  forever. 

Lisping  infancy,  therefore,  youth,  manhood,  and  decrepit  age, 
come  together  to-day;  matron  and  maid,  as  well  as  the  sun-burnt  mil- 
lions from  the  plough  and  the  vessel's  decks,  should  come, — all  profes- 
sions and  ranks,  and  forms  of  faith,  political  or  religious, — from  every 
hill,  and  valley,  and  prairie,  of  our  beloved  country,  from  Maine  to 
California, — all  gather  in  joyful  throngs,  and  all  bend  in  veneration 
before  the  glorious  event,  and  its  thrice-glorious  doctrines. 

*  Delivered  to  citizens  of  different  parties,  July  4,  1850. 


576  ORATION   AT   PORTSMOUTH. 

This  is  not,  that  almost  fourscore  years  ago  some  plain  American 
farmers,  planters,  merchants,  and  lawyers,  assembled  in  a  small  room 
near  Independence-square,  in  Philadelphia.  It  is  not,  that  some 
among  them,  with  iron  heart  and  eagle  eye,  dared  do  all  which  had 
immortalized  the  Brutuses  and  Cromwells  of  other  ages,  and  not  only 
speak  their  wrongs,  but  redress  and  avenge  them.  It  is  not,  that  then 
and  there  was  done  a  deed  to  become  a  newspaper  theme  for  a  brief 
month  only,  or  to  be  known  not  beyond  the  few  cities  and  settlements 
then  scattered  over  the  eastern  slope  of  the  Alleghanies,  containing  a 
population  but  little  larger  than  the  State  of  New  York  now  does 
alone ;  or  to  live  in  its  influences  only  a  generation,  a  half-century 
even,  and  then  die  out,  as  have  perished  from  the  page  of  history  mil- 
lions of  other  occurrences,  at  first  far  more  dazzling  to  the  inexpe- 
rienced eye.  But  it  was,  that  then  occurred  an  event  which  has 
become  incorporate  with  Liberty  herself,  —  is  a  part  of  her  substance 
no  less  than  symbol,  —  and  shall  endure  as  long  and  spread  as  wide  as 
the  longest  and  widest  portion  of  her  magnificent  empire.  An  event, 
which,  if  not  destined  to  revolutionize  all  nations  and  people,  has  been 
already  felt,  in  some  degree,  wherever  civilization  pervades  mankind, 
and  is  likely,  in  coming  ages,  more  and  more,  by  "the  war  of  opin- 
ion" it  wages,  to  leaven  the  political  views  of  the  whole  habitable  globe. 
To  dethrone  a  king  by  oppressed  subjects  has  always  been  one  of  the 
most  glowing  themes  in  the  annals  of  the  human  race.  To  change  a 
dynasty  of  kings  looms  up  still  larger  in  the  horizon  of  history  and 
poetry.  To  alter  the  whole  form  of  government  in  any  country  often 
has  a  bearing  more  important  than  either  on  its  future  destinies ;  and 
especially  so,  if  it  be  a  change  from  slavery  to  freedom,  for  the 
people  at  large.  But  to  do  all  these, —  more  than  all, — to  show  con- 
summate skill  in  the  cabinet  at  the  same  time  with  heroic  bravery  in 
the  field,  and  to  accomplish  a  revolution  in  principles  of  government 
and  legislation  by  the  pen  and  the  tongue,  while  another  was  carried  on 
and  gloriously  sustained  by  the  sword — by  the  blood  of  freemen, 
poured  out  in  torrents  wherever  the  invader  polluted  the  soil,  or  a 
ruthless  savage  was  let  loose,  with  tomahawk  and  torch,  on  an  exposed 
frontier,  —  this  was  an  event  that  all  the  millions  who  have  been  sig- 
nally blessed  by  it  may  well  celebrate,  for  its  grandeur,  —  may  long 
and  loudly  celebrate, —  and  will,  by  God's  permission,  hold  in  holy 
remembrance,  while  they  preserve  any  of  the  virtues  of  the  patriots 
who  accomplished  it.  # 

Myriads  elsewhere,  who  have  enjoyed  only  some  of  its  reflected 
light,  would  shame  us  for  any  neglect  of  so  great  a  revolution,  by  their 
heart-felt  rejoicings  over  only  so  much  of  its  influences  as  have 
reached  and  animated  them  in  the  cause  of  political  reform ;  because 
it  has  been  the  talisman  and  tocsin  to  freedom  in  all  countries  since. 
Whenever,  for  the  last  half-century,  an  oppressed  people  have  broken 
their  chains, — whether  in  France,  or  Hungary,  or  the  classic  soil  of 
Italy, — the  recollection  of  American  independence  has  strengthened,  if 


ORATION   AT   PORTSMOUTH.  577 

not  guided,  the  blow ;  and  when  tyrants  since  have  trembled  at  popular 
indignation,  and  listened  to  remonstrances,  and  relented  or  reformed, 
the  memory  of  American  liberties  and  victories  has  struck  terror  to 
their  hearts,  and  made  them  relent,  oftener  than  arms  or  arguments,  or 
a  returning  sense  of  justice  towards  the  victims  of  their  wrongs. 

Not  only  have  this  Western  Continent  and  some  of  its  adjacent 
islands  —  both  sides  of  the  Andes  —  been  thus  made  vocal  with  songs 
of  gratitude  for  the  example  set  this  day,  but  Europe,  from  the  Baltic  to 
the  Mediterranean,  has  felt  the  influence  of  some  of  its  sacred  principles, 
and  been  slowly  but  surely  reforming,  in  order  to  save  at  all,  a  por- 
tion of  its  superannuated  institutions.  Even  Asia  has  witnessed  a 
grand  vizier  appealing  through  the  press  in  favor  of  popular  education 
and  the  welfare  of  the  people  at  large ;  and  ere  another  century  closes, 
it  would  not  be  more  extraordinary  to  see  such  principles  prevailing  in 
China, — in  one  kingdom  alone  of  the  populous  east, — half  of  the  whole 
human  race.  Misunderstood  and  misrepresented,  I  admit,  have  often 
been  the  character  of  our  ^Revolution,  and  the  designs  and  doctrines 
of  the  patriots  who  accomplished  it ;  and  many,  it  must  be  conceded, 
have  been  the  outrages  committed  under  a  pretence  of  justification 
through  its  principles,  as  flagrant  crimes  have,  in  all  ages,  been  com- 
mitted under  the  sacred  names  of  liberty  and  religion.  But  the  estab- 
lishment of  American  independence  is  no  more  answerable  for  such 
abuse,  such  perversions  of  her  holy  cause,  than  are  religion  and 
liberty  for  the  profanations  before,  as  well  as  since,  committed  under 
their  consecrated  banner ;  and  proceeding,  as  we  ought  on  occasions 
like  this,  to  make  some  inquiry  into  the  true  civil  consequences  of  that 
independence,  no  less  than  its  military  daring,  in  order  to  appreciate 
duly  the  greatness  of  the  event,  it  will  be  found  that  their  legitimate 
operation,  their  true  essence,  their  full  and  perfect  work,  both  here 
and  elsewhere,  is  likely  to  prove  most  auspicious  to  the  human  race. 

In  forming  a  correct  estimate  of  the  magnitude  of  the  event  we  now 
commemorate,  the  principles  involved  in  it  are  vastly  more  important 
than  all  its  battles  or  military  glories.  Not  that  I  would  be  unjust  to 
heroism  in  the  field  in  a  good  cause,  or  be  ungrateful  to  those  who 
have  exposed  their  lives,  as  well  as  fortunes,  and  sacred  honor,  for  their 
country,  from  Leonidas  and  Scipio  of  antiquity,  to  the  Washingtons 
of  modern  days.  But  it  behooves  us  all  to  remember  that,  even  in 
modern  days,  physical  bravery  is  often  wasted  in  a  bad  enterprise,  and 
perverted,  in  the  Tamerlanes,  and  Caesars,  and  Napoleons,  and  Santa 
Annas,  to  enslave  mankind,  as  frequently  as  to  emancipate  them ;  and 
that  its  triumphs  are  transient,  personal,  and  at  times  die  in  their  con- 
sequences as  quickly  as  their  authors  crumble  into  dust,  and  as  their 
withered  hopes  and  guilty  ambition  moulder  with  them,  in  one  common 
grave.  Political  principles,  on  the  contrary,  are  eternal.  They  per- 
vade society  and  government,  as  air  and  water  pervade  physical  being. 
They  control  them,  too,  as  the  different  elements  control  vegetation  and 
animal  life ;  and  they  move  the  whole,  as  the  mechanic  powers,  and 
49 


578  ORATION  AT   PORTSMOUTH. 

other  great  laws  of  motion,  constitute  a  mechanism  that  moves  the 
universe  ;  and  they  will  continue  to  do  this  as  long,  as  widely,  and  as 
deeply,  as  the  others  pervade  matter ;  and  in  this  way  civilization  and 
liberty  are,  if  ever,  to  become  universal,  eternal. 

Among  the  high  justifying  principles  involved  in  any  civil  contest, 
one  of  the  highest  was  at  stake  in  the  Revolution  of  1776,  and  tended 
much  to  enhance  its  lofty  interest,  and  the  magnificence  of  its  conse- 
quences. It  was  the  principle  of  self-government.  That  lies  at  the 
foundation  of  all  security  for  liberty.  That  made  the  struggle  vital,  as 
well  as  righteous.  The  first  illustration  of  this  principle  was,  that 
man  should  not  be  taxed,  except  by  himself  or  agent.  "  No  taxation 
without  representation,"  reverberated  through  every  American  village 
and  legislative  assembly, —  crossed  the  ocean,  and  rung  through  the 
halls  of  Parliament  and  the  palace  of  St.  James.  The  next  illustration 
involved  the  idea  of  natural  equality  in  political  power,  and  the  duty  of 
all  government  to  respect,  shield  and  enforce  those  equal  rights,  and  carry 
out  all  their  elevating  influences  on  the  toiling  millions,  no  less  than 
other  classes.  It  is  these,  and  not  the  burning  of  gunpowder  and  the 
hecatombs  of  killed  and  wounded,  which  have  imparted  such  a  magni- 
tude to  that  contest  and  its  successful  results,  and  have  given  to  those 
over  the  civilized  world  almost  the  interest  of  a  great  epic  poem. 

Other  people,  in  ages  long  gone  by,  had  revolted  against  tyranny. 
The  Greek,  and  the  Iberian,  and  the  Gaul,  and  the  painted  Pict,  and 
the  haughty  Briton,  had  before  flown  to  arms,  when  trodden  down ; 
and  the  Roman,  the  conqueror  of  the  world,  whose  triumphal  proces- 
sions were  filled  with  captive  monarchs  from  Africa  and  Asia,  no  less 
than  Europe, —  the  proudest  of  the  proud,  the  bravest  of  the  brave, — 
was  still  at  times  forced  to  retreat  to  the  Sacred  Mount,  to  wring  jus- 
tice from  an  uncompromising  Senate.  But  scarcely  ever  before,  in  the 
long  tide  of  time,  did  a  whole  people  throw  off  a  government  on  the 
broad  basis  of  violated  compacts,  broken  charters,  taxation  without 
representation,  oppression  and  wrong  under  the  forms  of  law,  and  a 
virtual  dissolution  of  all  the  former  political  ties  between  the  same 
races.  Boldest,  calmest,  firmest,  if  not  first,  —  then  it  was  at  the 
cannon's  mouth,  after  respectful  petitions  had  been  exhausted,  our 
fathers  appealed  to  the  judgment  of  the  civilized  world  for  their  justifi- 
cation in  claiming  the  inalienable  rights  of  human  nature,  and  in  fight- 
ing for  the  powers  of  self-government. 

It  indicates  another  remarkable  feature  in  the  contest — the  extreme 
caution,  the  prudent  deliberation,  the  full  vindication  of  their  measures, 
before  resorting  to  violence. 

Long  misrule  over  them  had  broken  and  forfeited  all  political  obli- 
gations before  existing  from  them  to  their  haughty  masters.  They  at 
last  felt  justified  to  fly  to  arms,  and  defend  the  rightfulness  of  rebellion 
against  oppressions  so  flagrant.  But  much  had  they  known  and 
reflected,  and  acted  on  the  hypothesis  that  every  clear  right  need  not, 
at  all  times,  be  asserted  or  pushed,  at  all  hazards;  as  this  would  be 


ORATION   AT   PORTSMOUTH.  579 

vain,  if  at  all  times  it  could  not  be  successfully  enforced,  or  the  abuse  of 
it  be  avenged.  For  this  reason,  they  waited  for  increased  strength. — 
they  delayed  till  more  wealthy,  as  well  as  populous, —  they  counted 
fully  the  cost  of  independence,  before  erecting  its  bold  temples.  They 
weighed  every  consequence  with  far-seeing,  long-suffering  patience, 
before  an  actual  resort  to  blood.  If  other  people,  trained  and 
educated  differently,  uncalculating,  reckless,  sometimes  ferocious,  had 
occasionally  rushed  headlong  into  the  most  sanguine  excesses,  and  had 
done  it  often  only  to  be  overthrown  and  reduced  to  ivorse  bondage,  or 
only  to  substitute  anarchy  for  despotism,  such  were  examples  to  be 
shunned,  rather  than  imitated,  by  the  descendants  of  the  Pilgrims. 
These  last  were  formed  in  an  iron  mould  of  prudence,  intelligent  fore- 
cast, and  religious  self-control.  The  helots  of  Sparta,  uneducated  and 
uncalculating,  under  bitter  oppression,  might  seek  at  once,  regardless 
of  consequences,  to  cut  the  throats  of  their  powerful  masters;  but 
it  would  be  often  worse  than  vain,  and  only  increase  the  weight  of 
their  chains.  So  the  slaves  of  Rome  might,  at  times,  be  goaded  by 
cruelty  into  a  servile  war,  unprepared,  undisciplined,  and  abortive. 
And  Galbas,  Wat  Tylers,  and  Jack  Cades,  might  lead  unsuccessful 
insurrections,  in  various  ages,  against  some  flagrant  wrongs,  which 
by  man's  nature  and  passions  are  almost  unbearable  without  attempts 
at  vengeance ;  and  may  strive,  without  much  reflection  as  to  success, 
to  extirpate  those  who  had  pillaged  them,  or  desecrated  their  hearths 
and  altars,  destroyed  their  household  gods,  and  violated,  if  not  carried 
into  desolate  captivity,  their  wives  and  daughters. 

But  the  American  Revolution  began  differently,  and  was  conducted 
differently,  and  has  ended  differently.  It  began  by  argument,  not 
force, —  by  indignant  remonstrance  against  abuse,  and  by  persevering 
petition  for  security  to  great  rights.  It  was  a  contest  for  principles, 
rather  than  sovereign  power.  It  was  carried  on,  not  for  a  month,  or 
a  year,  or  a  generation,  but  a  whole  age  ;  and  by  book-men,  at  first, 
rather  than  swords-men.  It  was  fought  early  and  long  in  the  closet 
and  printing-office ;  in  the  forum,  and  pulpit,  and  Provincial  Assembly ; 
in  the  courts  of  law;  before  the  Privy  Council  ably  by  Franklin, 
however  stigmatized  by  "the  cold  serpent  tongues"  of  wily  Wedder- 
burnes  in  the  halls  of  Parliament ;  before  the  estates  of  the  realm, 
king,  lords,  and  commons ;  —  relying,  with  a  lofty  confidence,  on  God 
and  their  right,  rather  than  flying  at  once  to  the  sword  and  the 
tented  field. 

It  was  not  till  all  peaceful  means  were  exhausted,  and  the  unalien- 
able and  natural  rights  of  man  became  otherwise  past  redemption,  and 
a  long  training  and  preparation  for  extreme  measures  had  been  forced 
on  them,  that  the  Revolution  broke  out  into  armed  resistance. 

Then  and  there  the  right  to  resume  self-government  by  a  people 
long  suffering  was  claimed  and  maintained.  This,  it  will  be  seen,  was 
not  resisting  by  violence  laws  they  themselves  had  participated  in 
making ;  nor  was  it  hostilely  renouncing  allegiance  till  the  protection 


580  ORATION   AT   PORTSMOUTH. 

due  for  it  had  been  withheld ;  nor  lightly  stirring  up  rebellion,  for 
slight  causes,  and  without  long  endurance  of  wrong,  and  patient  efforts, 
in  all  peaceful  ways,  to  obtain  redress.  But  it  was  rather  with  sage 
deliberation,  tfvith  reasoning  most  urgent,  with  missions  most  able,  with 
remonstrances  unanswerable,  with  entreaties  most  intense,  with  appeals 
to  kindred  blood  and  kindred  interests, —  to  all  good  men,  and  angels, 
and  Deity  himself, —  to  turn  the  hearts  of  their  oppressors,  that  they 
preceded  any  resort  to  force ;  and  they  persisted  in  that  force  no 
longer  or  further  than  was  necessary  to  establish  that  great  right  of 
self-government,  without  which  they  had  found  not  only  property,  but 
liberty  and  life,  exposed  to  constant  outrage.  The  burning  detail  of 
their  grievances,  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  is  sufficient  to 
make  our  blood  boil,  even  after  the  lapse  of  almost  a  century.  Let  us, 
then,  disclaim,  for  the  Hancocks,  and  Langdons,  and  Washingtons,  of 
the  great  and  glorious  day  which  witnessed  our  independence,  any  of 
the  reckless  seditions  that  so  often,  for  trifling  reasons,  have  disfigured 
the  earth  before  or  since.  Let  us  disclaim,  for  the  whole  galaxy  of 
patriots  and  heroes  who  have  mingled  in  that  Revolution,  any  brutal 
fondness  for  blood,  or  any  regicide  war  upon  other  forms  of  govern- 
ment, or  any  hostility  to  the  just  rights  of  property,  the  prevalence  of 
order,  and  the  reign  of  law.  Their  aim  was  higher  and  nobler.  They 
sought  security  to  themselves  and  posterity  for  all  those  sacred  liber- 
ties, and  those  elevating  powers,  which  distinguish  man  from  the  beast, 
and  the  freeman  from  the  slave. 

In  this  way  alone  could  they  successfully  have  accomplished  the 
great  mission  assigned  to  them  on  earth.  But  another  work  was  to  be 
done.  They  not  only  had  to  declare,  but  establish  and  guarantee  by 
every  safeguard  which  human  prudence  could  devise,  their  national 
independence,  and  all  the  glorious  results  of  such  an  independence. 

It  was  not  enough  to  be  free ;  for  free  was  the  Indian  barbarian  in 
the  forests  near  them, —  free  was  many  a  Tartar  horde  in  the  wilds  of 
Asia, —  free  many  a  savage  islander  in  the  waste  waters  of  the  Pacific. 
But  it  was  to  be  free,  with  pledges,  securities,  and  checks  against  mis- 
rule,—  with  institutions  suited  to  perpetuate  freedom  and  order.  More, 
beyond,  higher,  than  all  this, —  it  was  to  be  free  with  systems  of 
education  and  morals  suited  to  understand  and  insure  equal  legislation, 
and  equal  rights  of  conscience,  and  equal  political  power,  as  these 
alone  can  rescue  revolutions  from  anarchy,  or  a  relapse  into  military 
despotism.  What  is  that  government  worth  to  society  at  large  whose 
seat  and  security  are  a  mere  camp  ?  whose  administration,  like  Boli- 
var's, is  but  a  continued  campaign  ?  or,  like  Robespierre's  and  Marat's, 
but  the  anarchy  of  mobs  or  the  terror  of  guillotines  ? 

Then  and  therefore  came  their  second  great  struggle.  It  was  to 
secure  well  what  they  had  won.  Their  first  struggle  had  been  with 
oppressors  from  abroad  and  traitors  at  home.  The  first  had  been  to 
free  their  limbs  and  minds  from  fetters,  that  they  might  be  able  to 
move  unshackled.     The  next  was  to  shape  their  movements  wisely. 


ORATION   AT   PORTSMOUTH.  581 

The  result  of  the  first  was  emancipation.  The  second  was,  to  use  it 
as  God,  nature,  reason,  intelligence,  and  liberty,  united,  should  prompt, 
and  not  as  mere  impulse  or  passion  might  impel  them.  The  first 
required  courage  in  the  field,  skill  in  foreign  negotiations  for  succor, 
firmness  against  the  wiles  used  to  deceive  and  disarm  them.  The 
last,  wisdom  in  the  cabinet  and  in  council,  sagacity  in  deliberative 
assemblies  of  all  kinds,  intelligence  in  every  village  and  in  every  farm- 
house or  household,  honor  and  morality  in  every  manly  breast  that  was 
now  to  exercise  the  liberty  which  had  been  recovered,  and  so  exercise 
it  as  to  preserve  it,  and  to  preserve  so  as  to  render  it  redolent  with 
blessings  to  himself,  his  children,  his  country,  and  the  coming  ages 
of  every  region  of  the  world. 

This  was  the  noblest  work  of  all.  The  first  was  indispensable  to 
begin  it.  But  this,  the  second  great  undertaking,  was  to  test  the 
utility  and  duration  of  the  first ;  and,  instead  of  giving  vent  to  the 
mere  animal  energies  of  war  and  civil  broils,  was  to  restrain  and  regu- 
late them,  and  to  build  up  an  empire  worthy  the  contest  they  had  just 
encountered,  and  plan  and  perfect  institutions  and  systems  which 
should  secure  great  principles,  and  use  them  in  a  manner  to  benefit 
and  control  their  whole  race, —  showing  more  especially,  as  to  them- 
selves, that  they  ha-d  not  sacrificed  life  and  treasure  in  vain,  or  in 
mere  angry  and  petulant  hostilities  with  a  tyrannical  parent. 

What,  then,  were  the  chief  political  safeguards  to  self-government 
which  they  proceeded  to  secure  for  the  future  ? 

The  greatest  of  all,  in  form,  were  written  constitutions.  They  were 
made  to  bind  both  rulers  and  ruled,  and  prescribe  the  duties,  as  well 
as  powers,  of  both.  Not  that  there  had  been  no  pledge,  by  those  in 
authority  before,  through  coronation  oaths,  or  charters,  wrested,  as  at 
Runnymede,  from  tyrant  kings,  or  bills  of  rights  voted  by  Hampdens, 
Cokes,  and  St.  Johns,  but  never  obeyed.  All  these,  however,  had 
been  imperfect,  almost  chaotic.  They  were  mere  fragments  of  consti- 
tutional forms,  rude  elements,  or  rocks  rough  from  the  quarry,  to  be 
afterwards  fashioned  into  useful  works,  and  polished  by  skill  and  expe- 
rience. None  of  them,  too,  were  deliberate  compacts  by  and  with  the 
people*  at  large,  and  binding  voluntary  givers  no  less  than  others  ;  but 
rather  they  were  concessions  of  intimidated  despots,  and  those  extorted 
usually  by  rivals  in  power,  and  made  to  them  rather  than  to  the 
masses ;  and  were  not  mutual  recognitions  of  rights  among  equals, 
standing  on  one  common  platform  as  immortal  and  accountable  free 
agents,  and  consulting  and  cooperating  together  in  the  great  work  of 
self  government. 

By  the  representative  system, —  making  the  voice  of  the  people 
known  and  felt  beyond  the  limits  of  a  single  city  or  town, —  such  com- 
pacts over  a  whole  country  had  become  feasible  and  useful,  and  able 
to  be  watched  over  and  enforced  with  the  ease  of  a  school  district  or 
militia  beat  of  the  drum.  All  could  thus  speak,  and  to  all.  And 
49* 


582  ORATION   AT   PORTSMOUTH. 

where  all  thus  speak  wisely ',  under  due  intelligence  and  training,  they 
must  and  will  be  obeyed. 

But  something  more  was  requisite  than  seals,  or  the  parchment  sig- 
natures of  constitutions.  The  latter  must  have  that  within  and  around 
them  which  passeth  mere  show.  They  must  fling  strong  securities 
about  popular  rights,  in  the  laws  and  habits  of  the  community.  They 
must  do  this,  as  they  did  here,  by  free  suffrage,  by  a  free  and  full 
voice  in  the  masses.  They  must  make  it  effective  by  making  it  fre- 
quent, through  short  terms  of  office  and  rigid  accountability  in  repre- 
sentatives. They  must  and  did  here  improve  the  representative  system 
itself,  by  exacting  constitutional  qualifications,  and  imposing  consti- 
tutional checks  on  their  agents ;  by  organizing  double  bodies  for 
decision,  so  as  to  make  concurrence  in  wrong  more  difficult ;  and  by 
requiring  fresh  and  frequent  elections  directly  from  the  people,  so  as 
to  render  the  popular  will  more  imperative,  and  pervading,  like  the  life- 
blood  of  the  system,  the  whole  machinery  of  the  body  politic. 

Throwing  open  thus  all  stations,  high  and  responsible,  to  talent  and 
virtue  and  learning,  all  classes  have  been  brought  gradually  to  love  and 
cherish  the  laws  as  made  by  and  for  them,  and  all  brought  to  sustain 
what  protects  and  honors  all ;  —  the  son  of  a  blacksmith  winning  vic- 
tories at  the  head  of  armies ;  the  son  of  a  farmer  president  over  the 
destinies  of  twenty  millions  of  people ;  the  son  of  a  carpenter  command- 
ing "  the  applause  of  listening  senates,"  or  holding  the  scales  of  justice 
in  the  highest  judicial  tribunal  of  the  Union. 

They  next  rendered  their  political  system  simple  and  well  under- 
stood, so  as  to  operate  with  ease,  no  less  than  skill,  by  separating,  as 
was  done  here,  the  powers  to  be  performed  for  the  people,  through 
their  representatives,  into  natural  and  plain  classes,  such  as  executive, 
legislative,  and  judicial ;  thus  being  enabled  to  select  for  each  agents 
best  qualified  for  each,  and  thus  enabling  these  agents,  by  so  beautiful 
a  division  of  public  labor,  to  become  more  perfect  in  their  respective 
spheres,  and  the  system,  as  a  system,  more  useful  and  acceptable,  and 
more  prized,  as  more  full  of  rainbow  hopes  to  the  great  popular  heart 
of  the  community. 

Anxious  to  render  their  constitutions  rich  in  the  securities  which 
near  six  thousand  years  of  experience  in  the  world  had  treasured  up 
and  spread  open  to  their  free  choice,  they  went  further,  and  imposed 
checks  the  most  rigid  and  solemn  on  various  abuses  that  had  for  ages 
filled  prisons  with  tears,  and  neighboring  countries  with  exiles,  and 
scaffolds  with  victims.  They  prohibited  the  suspension  of  the  writ  of 
habeas  corpus,  seeking  in  this  to  rescue  personal  liberty  from  long 
confinement,  without  trial,  in  dungeons,  towers,  and  bastiles.  They 
forbade  attainders  of  innocent  blood,  and  cruel  and  barbarous  punish- 
ments, whether  the  savage  fagot,  or  more  civilized  forms  of  torture  in 
"  Luke's  iron  crown  or  Damiens'  bed  of  steel."  They  prevented  an 
invasion  of  their  domestic  quiet  by  search-warrants  not  under  oath, — 
each  freeman's    house,  however  humble,  being  his  castle.      They 


ORATION   AT   PORTSMOUTH.  583 

denounced  ignominious  trials  for  crime  without  previous  indictment, 
and  any  abridgment  of  the  liberty  of  speech  and  the  press, —  those 
great  palladiums  of  popular  rights, —  or  stripping  the  people  of  the 
privilege  of  bearing  arms,  and  thus  exposing  their  rights  to  wanton 
aggression.  And,  finally,  they  tabooed  most  solemnly  any  restraints 
on  liberty  of  conscience,  which  their  Pilgrim  fathers  had  braved  the 
wrath  of  bigotry  at  home,  and  hazarded  three  thousand  miles  of  ocean 
and  exile  in  a  savage  wilderness,  to  enjoy  with  tranquillity. 

Mingled  up  and  interwoven  with  all  this,  calculated  to  secure  what 
they  had  conquered  with  so  much  blood  and  treasure,  were  the  habits, 
no  less  than  the  principles  and  opinions,  on  social  as  well  as  political 
matters,  which  had  grown  with  them  in  their  sojourn  here  for  a  cen- 
tury and  a  half,  and  which  were  to  be  improved  and  enlarged,  rather 
than  abandoned.  They  had  built  up,  from  the  start,  a  system  of  free 
schools,  to  enlighten  all,  rich  or  poor.  They  had  taught  in  them 
duties,  as  well  as  rights.  They  had  endowed  colleges  to  fit  some  for 
guides  in  seeking  the  ways  of  eternal  life,  and  tracing  out  the  inspired 
history  and  great  truths  of  Christianity,  so  as  to  be  able  to  worship 
God  in  more  purity  and  more  fidelity  to  all  his  wise  commandments  ; 
others  for  aids  in  preserving  health,  by  a  more  accurate  knowledge  of 
our  physical  system,  and  the  means,  botanical  and  mineral,  scattered 
around  us  of  healing  many  of  the  bodily  ills  which  flesh  is  heir  to ; 
guides  and  aids,  likewise,  to  understand  the  laws,  that  should  equally 
govern  high  and  low,  and  to  plead  the  cause  of  the  fatherless,  the 
widow,  and  the  oppressed,  and  administer  justice  as  unsoiled  as  the 
ermine  she  wears. 

They  had  organized  the  militia,  the  means  of  self-defence  as  well 
against  despotism  from  abroad  and  usurpers  at  home,  as  against  a  bar- 
barous foe,  hanging  night  and  day,  like  a  dark  cloud,  on  their  frontier, 
and  ready,  in  any  unguarded  moment,  to  fling  the  fire-brand  into  their 
habitations,  and  tomahawk  their  children.  They  had  secured  the 
invaluable  trial  by  jury,  as  a  safeguard  in  legal  persecutions  by  arbi- 
trary power,  and  had  been  trained  through  its  various  duties  to  a 
better  acquaintance  with  many  of  the  elements  of  self-government. 

And  by  a  system  of  religious  preaching,  as  well  as  free  toleration, 
added  to  their  schools  and  colleges,  they  had  permitted  and  encouraged 
all  to  enjoy  the  moral  means  of  learning  how  to  exercise  the  great 
privileges  and  liberties  which  the  Revolution  secured  to  them,  with  an 
eye  to  what  was  just  towards  each  other  and  the  rest  of  the  world ; 
with  the  conviction  of  their  own  accountability  hereafter,  as  well  as 
here,  for  all  abuses  of  those  liberties ;  and  with  some  laudable  ambition, 
if  not  pride,  to  satisfy  a  doubting  world  that  man,  so  educated  and 
trained  and  free,  was  capable  of  good  self-government,  and  would  not 
throw  discredit  on  the  hopes  of  philanthropists,  who  had  indulged  the 
fond  expectation  of  further  progress  in  social  improvement,  and  of 
seeing  realized  their  theories  of  additional  ameliorations,  both  in  gov- 


584  ORATION   AT   PORTSMOUTH. 

eminent  and  the  general  condition  of  humanity.  Thus  they  stood,  and 
thus  we  still  stand,  when  so  many  others  have  fallen. 

Thus  stood,  and  still  stand,  not  only  the  Puritan  of  New  England, 
but  the  staid  and  enterprising  Hollander  of  New  York,  the  industrious 
Quaker  and  German  of  Pennsylvania,  the  chivalrous  Virginian  and 
Carolinian,  and  now  millions  of  their  descendants  in  the  mighty  west. 
Thus  may  they  forever  stand,  one  and  indivisible  ! 

It  is  thus  only,  when  seeking  improvement  and  prostrating  tyranny, 
that  man  acts  up  to  the  original  dignity  of  his  nature,  and  seems  to 
fulfil  the  apparent  design  of  Providence  in  his  high  destiny.  He  once 
communed  with  God  himself  in  the  garden  of  Eden.  His  companions 
since  have  often  been  angels.  He  is  still  lord  of  this  lower  creation, 
when  acting  worthy  an  immortal  being,  and  clothed  as  he  is  with 
attributes  so  far  above  the  brutes  that  perish,  and  so  superior  to  the 
dead  matter  which  he  treads  under  foot,  and  destined  as  he  is,  when 
free  and  enlightened,  to  acts  of  heroism  and  patriotic  vengeance  on  all 
the  violators  of  his  just  rights.  Then  he  is  truly  man, —  truly  deserv- 
ing, by  his  lofty  deeds,  to  live  in  history,  sculpture,  and  poetry.  It  was 
when  acting  thus,  Akenside  exclaims  : 

"  Look,  then,  abroad,  through  Nature,  to  the  range 
Of  planets,  suns,  and  adamantine  spheres, 
Wheeling  unshaken  through  the  void  immense  ; 
And  speak,  oh  man  !  does  this  capacious  scene 
With  half  that  kindling  majesty  dilate 
Thy  strong  conception,  as  when  Brutus  rose 
Refulgent  from  the  stroke  of  Caesar's  fate, 
Amid  the  crowd  of  patriots,  and  his  arm 
Aloft  extending,  like  eternal  Jove 
When  guilt  brings  down  the  thunder,  called  aloud 
On  Tully's  name,  and  shook  his  crimson  steel, 
And  bade  the  father  of  his  country  hail ! 
For  lo  !  the  tyrant  prostrate  in  the  dust, 
And  Rome  again  is  free." 

The  failures  of  many  other  revolutions  were  not  unnatural,  when 
we  reflect  that  they  have  been  either  mere  wars  on  a  single  despot  or 
his  dynasty,  or  have  originated  in  wanton  hostility  to  particular  ranks, 
or  in  a  lust  for  plunder  of  the  rich, — holding  all  property  to  be  rob- 
bery, like  Proudhomme ;  or,  Fourier-like,  that  half  the  world  should  be 
an  almshouse  to  be  supplied  by  the  other  half;  or  indulging  in  a  dis- 
organized hatred  of  those  salutary  legal  restraints  winch  are  indispens- 
able, in  every  form  of  government,  to  the  safety  of  either  property  or 
life.  It  is  the  neglect  of  these,  and  of  the  means  to  uphold  them  with 
moral  and  intelligent  fidelity,  which  has  made  so  many  of  them  but 
mockeries  of  reform, — mere  devastations  of  property  and  life. —  useless 
deluges  of  passion  and  desolation  over  great  countries,  and  ruinous 
alike  to  the  advancement  of  civilization  and  the  great  political  destinies 
of  mankind. 

It  is  a  remarkable  fact,  that  when  Dr.  Franklin  returned  from  a 


ORATION   AT   PORTSMOUTH.  585 

mission  to  induce  the  Canadians  to  unite  in  support  of  the  holy  prin- 
ciples of  our  Revolution,  he  found  them  so  ignorant  of  all  which  was 
essential  to  understand  and  prize  the  great  struggle,  that  he  recom- 
mended to  Congress  to  send  an  army  of  schoolmasters  there  to  teach 
them,  rather  than  troops  to  fight.  The  character  of  that  population 
has  much  improved  since.  But,  the  world  over,  and  in  all  times,  what 
of  good,  as  a  general  rule,  can  be  expected  from  seditions  and  insur- 
rections of  mere  slaves,  with  neither  the  education  nor  morals  how  to 
use  power  wisely,  or  sustain  free  constitutions  1  What  of  good  from 
the  raw  and  vagabond  liberty  of  savages,  or  pirates,  thirsting  for 
"  beauty  and  booty,"  or  drunk  with  vengeance?  What,  too,  from  the 
frenzy  of  ignorant  fanaticism,  under  no  guide  but  fancied  impulses 
from  heaven,  which  too  often  are  but  promptings  from  hell?  What 
from  unenlightened  bigotry  or  superstition,  ready  to  burn  opposition 
at  the  stake,  and  ferocious  to  consign  mere  differences  of  opinion  to 
the  tender  mercies  of  an  inquisition  1 

Such,  we  have  seen,  were  not  the  principles  of  the  heroes  of  the 
Revolution  we  commemorate,  nor,  thank  God !  the  objects  and  meas- 
ures they  pursued  in  order  to  crown  it  with  utility  and  immortality. 
Some  of  their  policy  has  been  since  misunderstood  or  misrepresented ; 
and  especially  in  respect  to  the  extension  of  their  power.  Neither 
then  nor  since  did  they  or  their  posterity  look  to  amalgamation  or 
permanent  intermixture  and  union  with  other  nations  composed  of 
tyrants  and  illiterate  slaves,  in  carrying  out  triumphantly  a  govern- 
ment like  this,  though  for  national  objects  temporary  treaties  are  per- 
missible with  all  public  bodies.  But  it  is  admitted  that  "  the  area  of 
freedom"  they  have  ever  been  ready  to  extend,  when  more  territory 
was  needed  at  particular  points  for  outlets  to  our  commerce,  or  national 
security  in  war,  or  better  harbors  and  supplies  in  peace.  They  have 
not  been  false  to  such  great  interests,  and  frightened  from  them  by 
the  groundless  cry  of  ambition  or  rapacity ;  but  for  important  national 
objects  have  " annexed"  and  "re-annexed"  Louisiana,  Texas  and 
California, — hoping  to  fill  them,  in  time,  with  a  population  congenial 
and  useful.  For  reasons  like  these,  all  may  well  say,  Go  on,  when 
such  reasons  occur, — multiply  the  stars  in  your  national  banner, — 
stretch  forth  liberally  the  arms  of  your  Union  to  the  north,  as  already 
to  the  west ;  but,  so  far  as  regards  population  added,  let  it  be  as  much 
as  practicable  of  kindred  races  and  kindred  principles.  So  as  to  emi- 
gration ;  our  fathers  did  open  their  original  capacious  bosom  to  the 
emigrant  patriot  from  all  countries, — to  the  Kosciuskos,  the  Lafay- 
ettes,  the  Gallatins,  and  Emmetts.  They  have  welcomed  such  to 
their  two  and  a  half  millions  of  square  miles  of  virgin  soil,  their  mag- 
nificent rivers,  lakes  and  mountains,  and  their  common  right  of  com- 
merce, under  the  star-spangled  banner,  over  all  the  great  highways  of 
nations  in  every  ocean  of  the  globe.  They  have  invited  all,  who  love 
virtuous  liberty, — all,  of  whatever  creed  or  faith,  Protestant  or  Cath- 
olic, whose  morals  are  sound,  who  respect  the  laws,  and  are  ready  to 


586  ORATION  AT  PORTSMOUTH. 

defend  both  liberty  and  law  in  wholesome  purity, — to  embark  their 
fortunes  with  ours,  and  seek  here  a  peaceful  asylum  from  persecution 
and  chains. 

The  refusal  to  allow  this  by  Great  Britain,  and  to  favor  emigration 
here,  was  one  of  the  grievances  for  which  she  was  denounced  in  the 
Declaration  of  Independence  you  have  just  heard  read.  To  all  such, 
therefore,  of  sound  principles,  renouncing  all  foreign  allegiance,  we 
still  say, —  Come  and  cooperate;  help  to  fell  our  forests,  dig  our 
canals,  build  our  railroads,  adorn  our  professions;  help  to  drive  the 
plough  deeper,  to  swing  the  sledge  harder,  to  watch  the  spindle  and  the 
shuttle  on  our  thousand  waterfalls  closer,  to  fight  valiantly  our  com- 
mon battles  against  a  common  enemy,  whether  on  land  or  ocean. 

But  come  none  by  force;  and  none,  unless  now  or  likely  to  be 
qualified  to  sustain,  and  eager  to  perpetuate,  the  free  principles  and 
free  institutions  which  adorn  our  vast  republic.  We  want  no  draw- 
backs,— mere  Mexican  conquests;  nothing  not  essentially  American 
in  opinion  and  progress ;  nothing  to  neutralize  or  impair  our  energies, 
or  draw  us  from  the  improving  track  of  our  fathers,  but  everything 
which  may  strengthen  or  speed  us  in  the  great  career  we  have  begun, 
— everything  that  harmonizes  with  and  hastens  our  great  destinies, 
securing  unity  of  principle,  unity  of  taste,  unity  of  hope,  unity  of 
action, — and  then,  of  course,  will  there  be  unity  of  success. 

It  was  unity  of  action,  in  peaceful  efforts  at  improvements  and  pro- 
gress for  the  human  race,  that  we  have  ever  sought,  and  must  still  seek, 
at  home  as  well  as  a,broad ,  rather  than  rush  into  civil  strife,  or  overrun 
the  earth  with  violence,  like  the  descendants  of  Romulus  and  Remus, 
and  cause,  in  the  end,  that  to  perish  by  the  sword  which  has  been 
built  by  the  sword.  And  because  forced  into  a  war  of  liberty  or 
death  with  oppression,  and  armed  and  disciplined  from  their  cradles 
to  repel  the  Indian  scalping-knife  from  their  frontiers, —  having  long 
slept  with  their  rifles  at  their  pillows,  and  captured  Louisburg,  and 
fought  for  victory  with  Wolfe  at  Quebec, —  never,  never  did  they  love 
war  as  war, — the  death-bed  of  many  gallant  victims,  and  the  house  of 
mourning  to  many  kindred  and  fatherless,  and  the  desolate  waste  of 
fortunes,  and  blackened  ruins  of  not  a  few  of  the  other  bounties  of 
Providence,  and  hopes  of  mankind.  But  they  armed  for  it  rather  than 
live  abject  slaves,  and  as  one  of  the  stern  necessities  of  government 
and  human  society.  They  preserved  it  in  self-defence,  preventing 
butcheries  on  the  frontier,  in  repelling  the  conflagration  of  their  cities, 
in  upholding  the  sacred  rights  of  representation,  and  in  securing  from 
rapine  and  pollution  and  degradation  their  hearths  and  altars.  And 
though  forbearance,  under  the  mild  influences  of  such  principles,  to 
rush  rashly  into  hostilities,  and  to  violate  a  just  neutrality  among 
belligerents,  has,  at  times,  since  called  down,  on  them  and  their  poster- 
ity, taunts  of  cowardice,  and  false  accusations  of  preferring  gold  to 
honor  and  sordid  gain  to  principle,  yet  they  have  more  than  once, 
when  further  forbearance  ceased  to  be  a  virtue,  shown  to  a  censorious 


ORATION   AT   PORTSMOUTH.  587 

world  that  they  can,  when  need  be,  defend  their  rights,  and  avenge 
injury  and  insult  on  the  heads  of  their  foes. 

They  have  taught  oppressing  nations  and  wanton  violators  of  their 
flag,  plunderers  of  their  commerce,  invaders  of  their  soil,  and  impris- 
oners  and  murderers  of  their  citizens,  that  these  outrages  are  not  to  be 
perpetrated  with  impunity,  whether  at  piratical  Algiers  and  Tripoli, 
under  the  rule  of  the  crescent  and  the  bowstring,  or  at  the  Falkland 
Islands,  beneath  the  frozen  zone  of  the  south,  or  at  Sumatra,  in  the 
equinoctial  heats  of  India,  or  at  the  Feegee,  on  the  opposite  side  of  the 
globe. 

Among  the  coral  reefs  of  the  Pacific,  or  in  sight  of  the  halls  of  Mon- 
tezuma,—  wherever,  on  land  or  ocean,  in  the  western  or  eastern  hemi- 
sphere or  the  south,  by  savage,  semi-barbarian  or  civilized,  by  Pagan, 
Mahometan,  Infidel,  Turk,  or  Christian, —  wherever  an  American  citi- 
zen is  wronged,  or  American  property  plundered,  or  American  rights 
invaded,  there  the  stars  and  the  stripes  should  appear,  and  will  protect 
and  avenge.  There,  manfully,  when  all  other  reasons  are  exhausted, 
Americans  will  rush,  like  Warren  at  Bunker  Hill,  or  Stark  at  Ben- 
nington, and  hosts  of  others  through  the  whole  length  and  breadth  of 
our  Revolutionary  campaigns; — in  short,  like  Decaturs,  Mc Niels,  and 
Jacksons,  in  the  war  of  1812,  or  Worths,  Scotts,  and  Taylors,  since, 
they  will  prove  themselves,  on  every  fit  occasion,  ready  to  punish  the 
enemies  and  redress  the  wrongs  of  their  country.  Such  a  spirit  alone 
can  save  and  perpetuate  the  glorious  principles  of  this  day. 

It  is  not  a  thirst  for  conquest,  but  firm  resolve  to  sustain  national 
honor.  We  spare  the  vanquished ;  and  if  we  scale  the  Alps,  it  is  not 
to  seize  on  new  provinces,  or  ill-gotten  gold,  aiiri  sacra  fames,  but 
we  purchase  and  pay  for  empires,  when  needed,  though  we  could  have 
retained  by  the  sword  what  we  won  by  the  sword ;  and  thus,  by  the 
rights  of  war,  have  made  our  title  as  good  to  California,  as  it  was,  by 
treaty,  to  Louisiana.  A  different  temper,  shrinking  from  a  vindication 
of  national  honor,  would  make  us  sheep  to  be  devoured  by  the  wolves 
around  us ;  and  allow  Santa  Annas  to  enforce  their  menaces  to  occupy 
our  capital,  rather  than  we  to  retaliate  invasions,  and  hoist  the  stars 
and  stripes  over  the  walls  of  Mexico.  A  different  temper,  too, — not 
being  magnanimous  to  the  conquered,  and  forbearing  to  the  fallen, — 
would  tend  to  render  our  brave  troops  but  marauders,  or  armed  mobs, 
or  fierce  buccaneers.  Our  resistance  even  the  matrons  of  the  Revolu- 
tion had  the  moral  courage  to  inculcate ;  and  deserve  their  full  share 
in  its  glories,  for  inculcating  it  on  their  husbands  and  sons,  and  exhib- 
iting so  many  virtues,  and  so  much  heroism,  in  the  times  winch  tried 
men's  souls.  Our  pious  mothers  were  not  hostile  to  the  common 
enemy  wh6lly  for  the  oppressive  tax  on  their  tea,  but  because  they  were 
educated  by  the  Bible,  and  especially  by  Christianity,  in  the  great 
doctrines  of  equal  rights ;  and,  like  Spartan  women,  they  taught  their 
descendants — and  deserve  their  gratitude  for  the  patriotic  lesson — that 
it  was  nobler  to  be  brought  home  dead  on  their  shields,  than  fly  or 


588  ORATION   AT   PORTSMOUTH. 

submit  to  be  slaves.  A  revolution  originating  and  conducted  like 
ours,  illustrates  well  the  excellences  of  such  a  spirit,  and  embodies  it. 

A  revolution  thus  justified,  guided,  established,  has  become  a  model 
revolution  for  mankind ;  a  great  landmark,  a  colossal  beacon-tower  to 
all  future  times,  and  all  future  navigators  on  the  rough  sea  of  Liberty. 
When  truly  imitated,  it  has  scattered  blessings  in  its  train  more  widely 
than  even  Columbus  discovered,  or  Raleigh,  or  Cabot,  or  Americus 
Vespucius  explored.  And  it  is  by  these, —  by  its  genial  destinies  of 
human  rights,  its  fidelity  to  morals  and  laws,  its  freedom  for  conscience 
and  industry,  and  property  and  power,  to  all  who  desire  and  deserve 
them,  its  liberality  to  all  nations  and  creeds, — that,  as  before  observed, 
it  has  penetrated  deeply  the  popular  heart  in  Europe,  and  in  many 
cases  there,  and  in  some  even  in  despotic  Asia  and  benighted  Africa, 
has  relaxed  the  chains  which  there  were  not  yet  strength  enough,  and 
education  and  training  enough,  to  break. 

The  liberty  our  independence  sought  was  likewise  liberty  united 
with  law,  and  defended  by  law,  and  not  licentiousness.  The  liberty 
our  Revolutionary  sires  bled  for  was  to  sustain  personal  rights,  to 
protect  conscience  and  property, — not  violate  them;  to  shield  labor 
and  capital, — not  to  be  unmindful  of  either;  to  uphold  government, 
and  laws,  and  constitutions,  in  their  equal  and  just  exercise, — not 
overturn  them ;  and  to  change  their  governments,  and  laws,  and  social 
systems,  so  far,  and  only  so  far,  as  was  necessary  to  secure  their 
rights  from  being  afterwards  trodden  down  by  tyranny,  or  from  being 
invaded  by  ambitious  demagogues,  quack  statesmen  and  seditious 
anarchy,  at  home,  or  crushed  by  envious  rivalry  from  abroad. 

It  was  such  a  revolution,  and  such  only,  that  was  worth  having. 
Under  that,  down  to  the  present  moment,  the  same  laws  protect  a 
laborer  or  a  farmer  that  sustained  an  Astor,  with  his  ten  to  twenty 
millions  of  dollars,  and  an  income  equal  to  that  of  an  average  of  twenty 
thousand  or  thirty  thousand  tillers  of  the  soil ;  and  the  difference  in 
this  wealth  is  rather  the  result  of  fortunate  accidents  and  a  systematic 
life  of  sagacious  and  intelligent  industry,  than  of  any  invidious  dis- 
tinction in  favor  of  the  rich  over  the  poor.  Girard  and  Brown  are 
like  illustrations.  And  even  the  marble  trough  used  by  the  former  to 
feed  his  pigs  from  happened  from  no  cause  akin  to  extravagance,  or 
apart  from  the  calculating  spirit  of  thrift  in  the  long  run,  which  clings 
to  such  men  till  they  repose  in  the  grave. 

But  though  the  principles  of  that  revolution  were  so  pure,  and 
though  we  have  been  taught,  from  the  cradle,  to  regard  this  as  a  great 
festival,  because  our  liberties  were  then  won,  yet,  in  another  sense,  we 
all  know  that  Liberty  herself  did  not  then  first  alight  on  earth.  We 
fain  would  forbear  to  set  up  any  unjust  claims, — we  need  none;  and 
hence,  though  youth  and  age  then  left  the  plough  in  the  furrow,  and 
flew  to  Lexington  and  Bennington, — though  the  blacksmith  left  his 
forge  with  fires  unextinguished,  and  one  of  my  kith  and  kin  left  the 
corpse  of  his  father  unburied, — though  all  classes  rushed  forward,  and 


ORATION   AT   PORTSMOUTH.  589 

with  one  loud  hosanna  swelled  together  the  chant  of  Liberty,  and  fought 
together  her  fierce  battles, — yet  it  was  not  so  much  that  she  was  the 
first-born,  as  that  she  was  once  more  freed  from  the  manacle  and  dan- 
gers, and  under  circumstances  favorable  to  her  future  security  and 
future  improvement; — not  that  she  had  never  before  bounded  over  the 
plains  of  Sparta  and  the  rocks  of  Athens,  or  wandered  on  the  banks 
of  Tiber,  or  climbed  the  Swiss  Alps, — but  that  she  was  about  to  be 
more  than  ever  before  secured  from  violence  j  that  she  was  to  be  better 
sustained  by  equal  constitutions  and  laws,  protected  by  numerous 
checks  and  balances,  and  hedged  around  by  a  wider  intelligence  among 
the  masses,  a  higher  state  of  morals,  and  three  thousand  miles  of  ocean 
between  her  and  her  worst  foes. 

It  was,  likewise,  that  the  liberty  they  were  about  to  save  from 
profanation — it  is  hoped  forever — was,  in  character  and  destiny,  in 
many  other  respects,  very  different  from  what  both  then  and  since 
deluged  many  of  the  fairest  portions  of  the  world  in  blood  and  misrule, 
— feeding  her  votaries  with  fruits  fair  to  the  sight,  but  more  bitter  in 
taste  than  the  apples  of  Sodom. 

It  was,  in  short,  the  liberty  of  civilization,  the  liberty  of  Christian- 
ity, the  liberty  of  wide-spread  intelligence  among  the  many ;  the  lib- 
erty of  an  elevated  condition  of  public  morals,  and  of  some  training 
and  discipline,  and  experience  in  the  principles  and  work  of  self-gov- 
ernment. Such  a  liberty,  though  among  rocks  and  ice,  is  preferable 
to  the  most  splendid  bondage. 

We  have  seen  that  the  care  and  labor  to  secure  that  kind  of  liberty 
long  and  permanently,  by  the  Revolution  we  celebrate,  were  as  great 
as  to  win  it. 

Because  they  did  not  wish  to  see  that  it  succeeded  every  change  of 
the  moon  by  a  new  constitution,  as  in  some  future  revulsions.  Not 
to  have  new  presidents,  or  consuls,  or  kings,  give  place  to  others  by 
violence,  as  often  as  theatrical  tyrants  appear  and  disappear  on  the 
stage ;  or  the  Deys  of  Algiers  are  disposed  of  by  the  bowstring ;  or  the 
small,  pigmy  republics  of  Italy  were  once  monthly  revolutionized, — 
sometimes  by  a  few  malcontents,  little  better  than  banditti, — or  Rome 
herself  again  and  again  put  up  at  auction  by  Praetorian  bands ;  or  as 
often  as  the  reigning  despots  in  Spain,  or  Portugal,  or  Mexico,  enter 
and  exit  before  the  bayonet  or  a  mob.  But,  on  the  contrary,  they 
sought,  and  millions  this  day  testify  that  they  succeeded  in  making  it 
evince  all  the  stability  and  probable  durability  of  the  oldest  govern- 
ment on  the  globe ;  as  for  more  than  half  a  century  we  have  exhib- 
ited not  a  single  change  by  force, — however  loud,  at  times,  and  men- 
acing the  tongue  of  faction, — scarce  a  single  day,  when  the  constitu- 
tion and  laws  have  not  triumphed,  and  stood,  not  only  unshaken  by 
any  of  the  angry  tempests  around  them,  but  washed  whiter  by  the 
party  surges  which  have  broken  at  their  feet. 

A3  such  a  revolution,  we  all  are  proud  this  day  to  recount  its  glo- 
ries, and  to  swear  at  the  altar  to  use  our  best  efforts  to  preserve  its 
50 


590  ORATION  AT  PORTSMOUTH. 

principles.  As  such,  it  accords  well  with  the  genius  of  our  people, — 
their  early  instincts,  and  their  sober  discipline  for  ages.  As  such  a 
revolution,  we  call  God  to  witness  our  fidelity  to  its  principles  in  peace, 
our  devotion  to  them  in  war ;  our  invocations  to  our  households  and 
neighbors ;  our  example  and  walk  in  private  and  public  life ;  our 
whole  energies,  intellectual,  moral  and  physical,  our  heart  and  soul, 
all  consecrated  to  perpetuate,  and,  if  possible,  influence,  every  blessing 
we  have  inherited  from  them.  It  is  to  be  gathered  from  these  consid- 
erations, that  some  increase  of  former  means,  and  some  addition  of  new 
ones,  are  to  be  put  in  requisition  by  us  to  secure  fully  these  good  pur- 
poses. They  are  wider — still  wider  spread  and  useful  education  among 
the  masses,  in  whom  is  most  of  the  political  power  of  the  country. 
They  are  purity  of  morals,  to  unite  with  intelligence,  in  giving  to  such 
a  tremendous  political  power  a  just  and  honest  direction.  They  are 
temperance  in  all  things,  but  especially  with  her  cold-water  armies, 
and  those  patriarchal  allies,  old-fashioned  industry  and  homespun  fru- 
gality. They  are  religious,  likewise,  at  all  times  to  be  "  named  with 
solemn  awe;"  it  maybe  of  one  shade  in  faith  and  forms,  or  of 
another, —  but  still  religion,  to  elevate  and  guide  all ;  without  any  Holy 
Alliance,  however,  between  church  and  State,  to  tempt  both  astray, 
and  corrupt  both.  They  are  equal  laivs,  also, —  not  leaving  equal 
power  an  empty  bubble,  but  making  it  operate  to  secure  equal  priv- 
ileges in  the  honors  and  wealth  and  pursuits  of  society. 

They  are  a  pure  administration  of  equal  laws, —  not  blunting  the 
spear  of  justice  when  you  "plate  sin  with  gold,"  nor  shielding  inno- 
cence only  when  not  in  rags,  nor  valuing  character  and  person  unless 
robed  in  purple  and  fine  linen, —  but  holding  the  scales  steadily  for  the 
toiling  millions,  as  well  as  for  wealth  and  power;  and,  at  the  same 
time,  on  the  other  hand,  protecting  property  and  guarding  the  rights 
of  the  great  as  well  as  the  humble, —  both  classes  standing,  in  this 
respect,  on  one  pedestal,  and  both  obedient  to  law,  in  order  that  they 
be  protected  by  law. 

All  must,  likewise,  be  prompt  and  bold  to  use  every  other  instru^ 
ment,  and  means  of  improvement,  which  the  long  experience  of  the 
world  may,  from  time  to.  time,  develop.  It  is  one  of  the  peculiar 
characteristics  of  our  people,  that  they  gather  suggestions  and  excel- 
lences from  every  age  and  every  subject,  and  every  region  of  the 
globe, — winnowing  wheat  from  the  chaff,  and  being  as  ready  to  adopt  a 
benefit  or  art  from  the  Arab  as  the  Englishman,  or  from  the  African 
as  the  European ;  having  opened  a  Pantheon  in  every  household  and 
State,  for  every  good  which  our  enterprising  commerce  can  collect  from 
every  quarter  of  the  globe. 

Let  the  treasures  of  all  time, — in  learning,  or  science,  or  govern- 
ment, or  in  social  comforts,  or  labor-saving  machinery, —  let  all  con- 
tribute to  our  common  and  national  progress  and  security.  In  this 
way,  the  inventors  of  all  ages  may  be  encouraged  with  hopes  of  being 


ORATION  AT   PORTSMOUTH.  591 

benefactors  to  some  such  future  government  as  ours,  and  not  faint  or 
falter,  though,  like  Galileo,  plunged  into  dungeons  from  bigotry,  or, 
like  Oliver  Evans,  languishing  in  prisons,  a  victim  to  the  once  stern 
laws  as  to  debt.  In  this  way,  martyrs  and  patriots  likewise  may  take 
courage  at  the  stake  and  the  scaffold,  and,  like  Cranmer  or  Russell, 
look  to  some  future  age  and  people  for  a  rich  reward  for  their  suffer- 
ings. In  this  way,  ungrateful  requitals,  by  ungrateful  contemporaries, 
should  not  dishearten  the  orator,  or  divine,  or  jurist,  or  statesman,  or 
patriot  warrior,  or  great  inventor, —  like  Faust,  of  the  art  of  printing, 
persecuted  as  leaguing  with  the  devil, —  or  the  great  discoverer,  the 
world-finder,  Columbus,  carried  home  in  chains.  They  sow  the  seed  for 
other  tongues  and  people,  it  may  be,  and  even  for  other  hemispheres, 
where,  in  due  time,  if  not  here,  all  the  scattered  good  of  all  ages  may 
be  garnered  up,  and  employed  to  advance  the  comforts  and  virtues,  as 
well  as  powers,  of  our  race. 

What  but  this,  and  things  like  this,  already  have  extended  our  for- 
eign commerce  so  as  scarcely  to  be  second  to  any  other  nation  on  the 
globe  ?  —  made  our  prospect  of  having  a  hundred  millions  of  people 
before  this  century  closes  ?  —  made  our  triumphs  in  machinery,  and 
manufactures,  and  agriculture,  almost  as  rapid  as  the  fabled  labors  of 
the  most  powerful  of  the  heathen  demi-gods  1  Our  power  over  rude 
nature  —  over  time  and  distance  —  magnified  often  a  thousand-fold  by 
steam,  and  the  railroad  and  the  electric  telegraph  widening  still  higher 
and  further  the  elevation  of  our  civilization  over  that  of  the  barbarians 
and  semi-barbarians  on  some  of  our  borders ! 

Another  advance  of  our  higher  liberty,  and  higher  duties  resulting 
from  it,  is  that  our  people  are  here,  under  American  independence, 
an  assemblage  of  the  most  devoted  friends  to  free  institutions,  from 
every  quarter  of  the  globe.  What  is  but  a  sprinkling  or  scattered 
ingredient  elsewhere,  or  in  other  systems  of  society  and  government, 
constitutes  here  the  mass. 

Our  high  mission,  then,  would  seem  to  be,  to  be  foremost,  as  ablest, 
to  improve  as  well  as  preserve  and  diffuse  this  over  the  world,  by  the 
influence  of  our  great  success  and  unequalled  prosperity,  rather  than 
by  Mahometan  violence ;  and  rather  than  being  officious  with  others, 
or  unjust  to  different  forms  of  government  and  different  systems  of  pol- 
icy from  our  own,  deeming  all  others,  with  Chinese  stupidity,  "out- 
side barbarians."  Not  Marplots, —  political  Paul  Prys, —  constantly 
intermeddling  in  the  domestic  affairs  and  domestic  institutions  of  the 
rest  of  mankind ;  but  rather  leaving  them  free  to  choose,  like  ourselves, 
and  rather  trusting  to  reason  and  example  for  their  reform, —  the 
mighty  power  of  public  opinion, —  and  gathering  around  ourselves  the 
light  of  all  ages,  so  as  to  profit  by  all  their  discoveries,  arts  and  im- 
provements, and  so  as  to  encourage  and  draw  forth  all  our  own  energies 
and  excellences.  When  vilified  from  abroad,  let  these  principles  and 
course  of  conduct  answer  for  us.  Permit  these,  also,  to  be  our  polit- 
ical missionaries  to  convert  the  rest  of  mankind  •  and  thus  verifying 


592  ORATION  AT  PORTSMOUTH. 

here  the  prophecy  concerning  us  by  Bishop  Berkley,  near  a  century 
and  a  half  ago,  "  Time's  noblest  offspring  is  the  last."  Push  forward, 
then,  like  your  fathers,  the  agricultural  and  mechanic  arts,  and  man- 
ufactures, and  commerce,  which  bless  all  they  pervade !  But,  like  your 
fathers,  too,  side  by  side,  erect  the  village  school  and  village  church  — 
not  only  to  diffuse  and  defend  popular  power,  but  enlighten  it,  elevate 
it,  purify,  and  thus  improve  and  perpetuate  it. 

If,  like  them,  you  continue  to  promote  all  these, —  improved  and 
improving  wherever  you  wander, —  well  may  you  not  only  be  encour- 
aged in  having  crowded  back  the  barbarian  to  the  mountains  and 
lakes,  and  in  having  crossed  after  him  the  Alleghanies  and  the  great 
monarch  of  rivers,  but  in  climbing  the  Rocky  Mountains  beyond,  and 
in  dipping  your  eye-brows  in  the  Pacific,  and  scattering  arts  and  civ- 
ilization, and  purer  morals,  over  the  sunny  islands  still  further  on 
towards  the  setting  sun. 

By  your  vast  commerce,  the  great  instrument  to  diffuse  modern  civ- 
ilization, the  great  anchor  of  hope, —  in  spreading  it  to  all  people, — 
not  only  can  the  benignant  fruits  of  your  spare  crops  and  useful  man- 
ufactures be  disseminated  wherever  they  will  prove  a  blessing,  but  your 
example,  and  principles,  and  institutions,  and  religion,  and  all  of  good- 
ness, and  greatness,  and  usefulness,  of  every  kind,  that  this  glorious 
day  secured,  and  will  shadow  forth  wider  and  wider,  till  they  encircle 
the  globe. 

I  fear  you  have  already  been  detained  too  long ;  but,  in  the  present 
crisis  of  our  beloved  country,  I  ought,  before  bidding  you  farewell,  to 
allude  to  one  other  consideration.  There  lurks  a  serpent  in  the  paths 
of  our  political  paradise.  It  is  disunion.  It  is  not  that  the  bands  are 
likely  to  be  suddenly  cut  or  torn  asunder  by  violence;  but  what  will 
they  be  worth,  if  neglected,  decayed,  and  allowed  to  perish  by  omis- 
sion of  duties,  and  of  the  compromising  temper  by  which  the  Union  was 
founded  and  can  alone  be  preserved  1  I  stand  not  here,  on  this  occa- 
sion, as  the  censor  of  any  political  party  or  section,  but  as  a  friend  to 
the  constitution  and  Union,  against  all  and  every  aggression  in  spirit 
or  deed.  If  the  bonds  of  a  common  language,  a  common  religion,  a 
common  country,  a  common  government,  and  all  the  great  common 
glories  of  the  last  century,  cannot  make  us  conciliatory  and  kind, — 
cannot  make  all  sides  forgive  and  forget  something, — cannot  persuade 
to  some  sacrifice  even,  if  necessary,  to  hold  us  together, —  force  is  as 
unprofitable  to  accomplish  it  as  fratricide  is  to  perpetuate  peace  in  a 
common  family ;  and,  broken  into  petty  States,  agitated  by  contend- 
ing parties,  and  ere  long  the  prey  of  some  military  chieftain,  we  shall 
all  tread  the  down-hill  path  already  strewed  by  similar  wrecks  in  the 
history  of  republics,  and  hence  more  disgraceful  to  us,  for  not  being 
admonished  by  so  many  deadly  warnings. 

But  enough  of  this  dark  side  of  the  picture.  The  same  Union 
which,  on  this  sacred  day,  helped  to  give  to  our  fathers  courage  and 
independence,  and  final  victory, —  the  same  Union,  which  has  since 


SPEECH  AT   ELIOT,    ME.  593 

enlarged  our  population  seven-fold,  extended  our  limits  to  the  Pacific, 
and  made  our  fame  and  example  known  over  the  habitable  globe, — 
that  same  Union  we  must  and  will  resolve,  one  and  all,  so  to  adminis- 
ter, so  to  conduct,  so  to  preserve,  as  to  restore  its  harmony,  and  increase 
forever  its  benefits,  as  well  as  strength  and  glory  ! 


SPEECH  AT  ELIOT,  ME.,  1844,  BEFORE  THE  PRESIDENTIAL 

ELECTION. 


Fellow-citizens  :  — I  hail  this  immense  assembly  and  beautiful  day 
as  bright  omens  to  our  cause.  Since  the  heavens  smile  upon  us, 
everything  else  necessary  to  success  is  to  be  true  to  ourselves  and  our 
principles.  We  have  some  very  great  duties  to  discharge  amidst  the 
festivities  of  the  occasion,  and  the  presence  of  the  lovelier  portion  of 
creation,  whose  countenances  gild  with  hope,  as  well  as  attraction,  every 
undertaking.  "We  are  called  on  to  perform  one  of  the  most  vital  obli- 
gations of  freemen,  in  examining  the  character  and  principles  of  the 
several  candidates  for  the  two  highest  offices  in  the  Union. 

In  doing  this,  well  does  it  become  us  to  be  fearless,  no  less  than  just ; 
because,  avoiding  all  individual  wrong,  we  are  responsible  for  this 
inquiry  to  God  alone. 

The  candidates  are  known  to  profess  different  sets  of  principles ;  on 
the  one  side,  those  which  are  democratic, —  on  the  other,  those  which 
are  federal.  The  first,  plain,  undisguised,  unadulterated, —  written  in 
sunbeams  of  light  over  the  whole  country ;  the  last,  those  high-toned 
doctrines  of  increased  and  increasing  power  in  the  central  government, 
which  fell  with  the  elder  Adams,  and  have  since  been  revived  and 
mingled  up  with  that  piebald  compound  embodied  in  the  code  of  mod- 
ern whiggery.  I  use  plain  language,  because  the  crisis  demands  it,  and 
it  becomes  freemen.  At  the  same  time,  I  shall  neither  abuse  private 
character  on  the  one  hand,  nor  flatter  and  fawn  on  the  other. 

The  public  conduct  and  opinions,  however,  of  all  candidates  for 
public  favor  are  public  property ;  and  those  brought  forward  by  each 
of  the  great  parties  in  the  coming  contest  are  presumed  to  profess  the 
50* 


594  SPEECH   AT   ELIOT,  ME. 

leading  principles  of  each,  and  to  represent  them,  and  properly  to  be 
held  responsible  for  them. 

Hence,  the  men  on  our  ticket,  whose  names  float  on  our  country's 
flag  above  us,  and  whose  praise  is  on  every  tongue  in  our  thronged 
ranks, —  Polk  and  Dallas, —  stand  ready,  now  and  ever,  to  enforce  the 
whole  creed  of  democracy ;  while  theirs  —  Clay  and  Frelinghuysen  — 
are  doubtless  ready  to  sustain  all  the  degenerate  practices  and  profes- 
sions of  the  present  whig  party.     Stand,  therefore,  by  your  own  col- 
ors, fellow-citizens  ;  you  then  know  who  is  who,  and  what  is  what. 
Make  your  opponents  fight  under  their  own  disgraced  pledges  and 
mottoes,  and  thus  defeat  any  shuffling  to  steal  away  our  names  or 
livery.    You  are  republicans ;  and  what,  in  a  republic,  is  more  fit  than 
that  the  honest  masses  should  be  republicans  1     You  are  democrats ; 
and,  in  a  democracy,  why  should  not  the  people  at  large  be  democrats  1 
How  else  are  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  and  all  your  free  consti- 
tutions, and  bills  of  rights,  and  democratic  institutions,  to  be  upheld  ? 
Unfortunately,  however,  even  in  republics,  ambition  will  warp  some ; 
interest,  sordid  interest,  mislead  others ;  and  local  or  personal  preju- 
dices betray  a  few  into  error,  and  array  them,  for  a  season,  under  new 
names  and  parties.     But  it  is  grossly  unnatural  for  the  honest  yeo- 
manry of  the  country  to  rally  round  any  standard  except  that  repub- 
lican one  under  which  our  fathers  marched,  and  under  which,  during 
forty  years,  in  peace  and  in  war,  in  the  conflict  of  '98,  as  well  as 
1812,  the  Union  ha3  been  preserved,  and  prospered  beyond  that  of 
any  other  land  on  which  the  sun  has  ever  shed  its  cheering  beams. 
Our  opponents,  conscious  of  their  weak  attitude  in  this  respect,  often 
resort  to  other  issues  than  those  of  principle,  in  order  to  blind  the 
people  to  the  great  and  paramount  questions  really  involved  in  the 
election. 

Hence  their  presses  and  speakers  dwell  so  long  and  loud  on  the 
opinions  of  some  of  Col.  Polk's  ancestors,  rather  than  his  own:  and 
they  would  fain  throw  dust  in  your  eyes,  as  if  his  grandfather's  or  his 
great-grandfather's  character,  rather  than  his,  was  a  prominent  topic 
by  which  the  destinies  of  twenty  millions  of  people  were  to  be  influ- 
enced the  next  four  years.  But  this  aristocratical  notion  of  inherited 
reproach  or  inherited  glory,  groundless  as  the  imputations  really  are, 
belongs  rather  to  the  meridian  of  a  monarchy  than  a  republic,  and 
needs  no  refutation  before  a  democratic  audience.  They  might  as  well 
go  back  and  arraign  any  of  us  for  the  kingly  notions  of  any  of  our 
forefathers,  back  to  the  Norman  conquest  or  Saxon  heptarchy. 

In  the  same  cavilling  temper  on  matters  not  properly  in  issue  as 
cardinal  points  of  public  policy  are  the  taunts  so  often  repeated 
against  both  Col.  Polk  and  Mr.  Dallas,  that  before  the  Baltimore 
nomination  they  had  not  been  known  and  discussed  as  candidates ; 
when,  in  the  same  breath,  they  are  obliged  to  admit  that  Mr.  Freling- 
huysen  had  been  quite  as  little  known  and  discussed ;  and  we  are  all 
aware  that  his  gallant  associate  had  been  rather  too  much  known  and 


595 

discussed  for  his  popularity,  in  all  the  great  races  where  he  has  been 
broken  down  and  defeated,  during  the  past  generation.  And  when 
some  old  heresies  are  conjured  up  against  our  candidate  for  Vice-presi- 
dent, do  the  assailants  forget  how  often  they  are  obliged  to  ask  an 
oblivion  to  the  early  peccadilloes  of  their  favorites,  and  urge  us  to  try 
them  by  their  present  opinions  alone  ?  Let  me  entreat  you  also  not 
to  be  led  off  by  these  experienced  huntsmen  on  other  false  scents, — 
such  as  whether  Mr.  Van  Buren,  whose  public  services  we  all  appreci- 
ate, has  or  has  not  been  properly  deemed  less  available  than  some  of 
his  competitors,  when  if,  for  any  personal  dissatisfaction,  he  could  be 
seduced  from  duty  to  the  democratic  cause,  and  confide  in  new  and 
hollow  adulations, — which  none  of  us  believe  of  him, — he  would  justly 
forfeit  all  the  respect  before  won.  Or  such  paltry  controversies  as 
whether  Col.  Benton  is  or  is  not  still  a  Simon  Pure  in  democracy, 
when  his  patriotic  motto  is  "  Everything  for  the  cause,  and  nothing 
for  men;"  and  when  that  cause,  we  all  hope,  is  destined  to  survive 
and  flourish  amid  the  wreck  of  hundreds  of  generations  of  frail  men. 
No,  democrats  of  Maine,  New  Hampshire,  and  Massachusetts, —  away 
with  such  irrelevant  issues,  such  false  lights  !  Let  me  invoke  all  who 
listen, — whether  guided  by  the  Star  in  the  East,  or  reared  amid  the  hills 
of  the  Granite  State,  or  come,  unconquerable  in  spirit,  from  the  iron 
shores  of  the  ancient  Bay  State, —  one  and  all,  lift  your  eyes  and  your 
hearts  to  nobler  game,  to  questions  befitting  the  high  duties  and  respons- 
ible positions  of  those  to  whom  is  committed  the  self-government  of 
a  mighty  nation. 

Ask,  are  the  views  of  our  candidates  and  party,  or  those  of  our 
opponents,  most  in  unison  with  what  animated  the  patriots  and  heroes 
of  our  Revolution  ?  Do  ours  or  theirs  accord  best  with  both  the  letter 
and  spirit  of  the  great  charter  of  our  liberties'?  Under  which  is 
popular  freedom  likely  to  be  safest,  the  laws  made  most  equal,  the 
rights  and  privileges  of  the  masses  sustained  the  firmest,  domestic 
tranquillity  best  insured,  and  foreign  aggression  and  foreign  wiles, — 
whether  aimed  at  our  commerce,  our  defences,  our  institutions,  or  the 
inviolability  of  our  territory, —  be  most  vigilantly  and  strongly  guarded 
against  ?  In  short,  which  will  be  likely  to  carry  out  most  implicitly 
the  wishes  and  will  of  the  people  themselves ;  the  power  in  our  gov- 
ernment which  must  rule, —  rule,  I  admit,  through  the  constitution, 
the  law,  and  the  ballot-boxes,  but  still  rule,  or  our  whole  political 
system  is  a  miserable  mockery. 

Now,  I  aver,  deliberately  and  fearlessly,  that  the  great  division 
between  the  two  tickets  exists  in  this :  that  one  pays  more,  and  the 
other  less,  respect  to  the  will  of  the  people  in  the  administration  of  the 
various  affairs  of  the  General  Government. 

It  is  well  known  we  profess  to  respect  that  will,  rather  than  slight 
it.  We  follow  the  declaration  of  that  will,  as  embodied  in  constitu- 
tions and  bills  of  right,  letting  all  doubts  operate  in  favor  of  the 
reserved  powers  of  the  people  and  the  States,  while  we  allege  that  our 


596  SPEECH   AT   ELIOT,  ME. 

opponents,  in  all  doubts,  assume  increased  authority  for  the  central 
government ;  and,  instead  of  asking  their  masters  —  the  people  and 
States  —  for  more  express  grants  in  questionable  cases,  take,  by  con- 
struction, at  once,  and  without  leave,  all  which  they  desire. 

In  proof  of  this,  as  their  chief  limitation  is  the  "general  welfare," 
how  can  it  amount  to  any  check,  when  no  party  in  power  can  ever  be 
so  shameless  as  to  attempt  what  it  will  not  gloss  over  with  the  varnish 
of  declaring  it  to  be  for  the  general  welfare  ? 

With  such  constitutional  opinions  and  practices,  the  custom  of  our 
opponents  to  disobey  express  instructions  on  these  topics  by  legislatures 
and  other  public  bodies  is  in  perfect  harmony,  and  is  another  conclu- 
sive evidence  of  their  grasping  principles.  If  these  instructions,  how- 
ever solemn,  stand  in  the  way  of  any  new  and  broad  construction  to 
monopolize  more  power  in  public  affairs,  without  new  grants  from  the 
true  fountain  of  power,  or  stand  in  the  way  of  new  and  plausible  proj- 
ects to  control  the  currency  or  regulate  the  industry  of  the  country, 
or  build  up  particular  favorite  classes  at  the  expense  of  the  rest,  they 
are  given  to  the  winds, —  they  are  trampled  under  foot. 

These  distinctions  between  the  two  parties  are  further  embodied  and 
illustrated  in  almost  every  dispute  about  principles  which  mingles  in 
the  present  canvass. 

Do  any  of  you  ask  me  for  specifications  ? 

They  thicken  on  every  side;  and,  in  the  outset,  in  making  the 
nominations  themselves,  our  opponents  have  attempted  to  bring,  unjusti- 
fiably, a  new  power  and  influence  into  the  struggle.  They  have  made 
an  appeal  to  religious  prejudices. 

It  is  now  boldly  asserted,  in  some  quarters,  that  their  candidate  for 
Vice-president  is  "the  Bible  candidate.' ''  In  his  person  is  an  attempt 
made  to  revive  the  old  unholy  alliance  of  church  and  State,  and  obtain 
the  aid  of  sectarian  prejudices  and  theological  zeal. 

We,  like  our  venerated  fathers,  honor  evangelical  piety,  sound  mor- 
als, and  the  church,  whether  with  or  without  a  bishop ;  but,  like  them, 
at  the  same  time,  we  abhor  the  profanation  of  religious  power  to  con- 
trol secular  government,  and  dictate  to  the  human  conscience.  We 
ask  the  arm  of  political  authority,  not  to  grasp  at  the  combination  of 
new  influences  to  operate  on  our  elections,  and  those  connected  with, 
and  tending  inevitably  to,  all  the  tests,  and  persecutions,  and  inquisi- 
tions, and  autos  dafe:  which  have  so  often  cursed  Christendom  with 
carnage,  and  which  expelled  our  ancestors  to  a  savage  wilderness. 

Sorry  as  I  have  been  to  see  sentiments  published  formerly  by  one 
of  the  candidates  sneering  at  the  principles  of  liberty  in  opinion,  and 
looking  to  uniformity  in  church  and  State  as  kindly  as  if  coming  from 
an  Archbishop  Laud,  or  from  under  the  cowl  of  a  monk,  yet  cool 
reflection  must  convince  him,  and  all  who  think,  and  reason,  and  read, 
that,  under  our  system  of  government,  nothing,  in  the  end,  is  more 
likely  to  derange  and  destroy  its  purity  than  the  efforts  now  going  on 
to  augment  the  strength  of  our  opponents'  ticket  by  these  appeals  to  a 


597 

new  element  in  our  elections,  and  to  defile  the  cause  of  true  piety  by 
sinister  attempts  to  make  it  a  mercenary  ally  in  our  party  strifes,  and 
then  inevitably  a  greedy  applicant  for  spoils  and  rewards  from  any 
partisans  it  may  have  helped  to  elevate  to  ill-gotten  power.  Discard, 
then,  every  feeling  of  fanaticism  or  bigotry,  and  honestly  render  to 
Caesar  the  things  which  are  Csesar's. 

Of  a  like  character,  as  to  the  increase  and  monopoly  of  power,  is 
another  question  in  the  contest,  concerning  the  free-suffrage  cause  in 
Rhode  Island. 

The  aim  of  our  opponents,  in  that  whole  struggle,  has  been  to  strip 
the  people  at  large  of  some  of  their  dearest  privileges;  and,  at  the 
same  moment,  to  augment  the  powers  of  a  few,  so  as  to  enable  them 
to  control  some  of  the  most  important  interests  of  the  many.  The 
whole  aim  of  our  friends  has  been  peaceably  to  establish  a  republican 
constitution  of  government  for  the  people  at  large,  in  place  of  a  kingly 
charter  of  incorporation  for  the  few  owners  in  a  land  company.  We 
wished  for  equality  in  rights, —  they,  inequality.  We  desired  that  all 
adults  (who  were  bound  by  taxes  to  contribute  to  support  government, 
and  liable  to  defend  it  in  the  militia)  should  participate  in  its  privileges 
and  powers.  They  excluded  the  whole,  however  highly  qualified,  if 
they  did  not  happen  to  own  a  share  in  a  certain  land  corporation, 
granted  a  century  and  a  half  ago,  by  the  most  profligate  king  of  the 
Stuart  name.  Our  friends,  innocently  enough,  among  a  republican 
people,  supposed  that  a  constitution  allowing  free  suffrage,  among 
other  rights,  to  all  properly  qualified  by  age,  mind,  and  educated 
habits  of  business,  to  self-government,  and  accustomed  to  pay  and  fight 
in  support  of  political  institutions,  was  more  suitable  to  the  advanced 
spirit  of  the  age  and  a  free  people  than  an  old,  worm-eaten  act  of 
incorporation,  intended  only  for  the  purposes  of  a  few  land-owners 
under  a  monarchy. 

And,  for  such  desirable  changes,  similar  to  what  had  taken  place  in 
every  other  State  of  our  blessed  Union,  and  so  clearly  proper  as  to  be 
since,  in  most  respects,  obliged  to  be  carried  into  effect  by  their  oppress- 
ors themselves,  Dorr  is  now  suffering  imprisonment  in  a  penitentiary, 
—  a  martyr  to  a  new  and  barbarous  penal  law,  made  in  order  to  reach 
cases  like  his,  and  administered,  as  well  as  made,  with  a  cruelty  and 
revenge  which  have  appropriately  been  characterized  as  Algerine. 

Remember  that  all  this  has  been  done  by  your  opponents  under  the 
boasted  liberality  of  the  nineteenth  century,  in  a  country  proud  of  its 
humane  principles,  and  among  a  New  England  people,  claiming  to  be 
peculiarly  devoted  to  the  mild  and  forgiving  doctrines  of  the  Gospel, 
so  full  of  peace  on  earth  and  good  will  to  men. 

But  do  you  approve  of  such  barbarity  1  Do  you  sanction  the  con- 
vict's badge  for  mere  differences  in  opinion?  Would  you  impose  the 
felon's  infamy  and  slavery  for  life, —  slavery  baser  and  more  miser- 
able than  what  wrings  tears  and  blood,  under  the  lash  of  the  task-mas- 
ter, in  the  most  savage  despotisms  of  the  old  world, —  would  you  inflict 


598  SPEECH   AT   ELIOT,  ME. 

this,  for  a  mere  difference  of  opinion  on  constitutional  questions,  in  this 
age  and  land  of  liberty  and  light )  Let  it  not  be  said,  in  extenuation, 
that,  however  peaceful  at  first,  and  no  blood  ever  shed  by  Dorr,  yet 
there  was  under  him  an  array  of  arms  in  the  end. 

There  was  no  array  of  arms  —  no  force  used  by  any  of  the  free- 
suffrage  party —  not  a  finger  raised  —  not  a  drum  beat,  or  gun  fired  ; 
only  quiet,  formal,  and  peaceful  steps  pursued,  till  after  the  constitu- 
tion was  actually  adopted,  and  their  opponents  called  out  troops  to  dis- 
turb its  operations,  and,  for  a  like  object,  invoked  the  march  of  federal 
troops.  Everything  done  by  Dorr,  after  that,  was  provoked  by  the 
violence  of  others,  and  in  a  conscientious  belief  that  duty  required 
those  to  repel  force  by  force  who  had  been  placed  in  power  by  a 
majority  of  the  people. 

Looking  to  all  the  original  grounds  of  controversy,  our  opponents 
seem  also  entirely  indefensible  in  this  unfortunate  conflict. 

The  objects  of  the  free-suffrage  party  were  not  only  reasonable,  as 
before  explained,  but,  by  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  by  the 
express  doctrines  of  almost  every  constitution  in  the  Union,  by  the 
opinions  of  the  best  jurists  and  statesmen  abroad  as  well  as  at  home, 
that  party  had  a  right  to  accomplish  those  objects  by  peaceful  conven- 
tions of  a  majority  of  the  people,  when  no  other  mode  of  redress  was 
provided  for  in  their  existing  laws  and  charters.  If  they  had  not  such 
a  right,  the  doctrine  of  self-government  is  a  delusion ;  and  the  reform- 
ation of  certain  abuses,  except  by  rude  force,  becomes  impractica- 
ble, and  our  whole  system,  by  which  we  are  now  an  independent  nation, 
resting  on  such  a  right  and  such  a  reformation,  is  a  false  system.  If 
we  deny  to  others  among  us  what  alone  gives  life  and  independence  to 
ourselves,  we  pursue  a  course  suicidal,  and  calculated  to  make  us  the 
reproach,  as.  well  as  laughing-stock,  of  the  world. 

When  we  go  to  facts,  the  case  is  equally  strong  for  the  friends  of 
free  suffrage.  A  decided  majority  of  all  the  male  adults,  and  some 
believe  that  a  majority  of  even  the  freeholders,  voted  for  the  adoption 
of  the  new  constitution ;  and  the  grievances  which  it  was  to  remove 
were  so  far  from  being  imaginary,  that  nearly  three-fifths  of  those  over 
the  age  of  twenty-one  were  entirely  disfranchised,  and  excluded,  also, 
from  prosecuting  in  the  courts  of  law,  or  having  any  voice  in  that  leg- 
islation by  which  were  daily  affected  their  characters, —  the  lives,  too, 
the  fortunes  and  the  sacred  honor,  of  their  wives  and  children,  as 
well  as  themselves.  They  were  thus  stripped  of  the  great  discrimi- 
nating badge  between  a  freeman  and  a  slave. 

Under  a  change  in  commerce  and  manufactures  in  Rhode  Island, 
which  had  made  more  than  half  of  the  adult  population  not  proprietors 
in  the  land,  but  prosperously  engaged  in  other  useful  employments,  was 
it  improper,  or  hasty,  to  ask  for  some  form  of  government  customary 
and  proper  elsewhere  for  the  whole  people,  rather  than  submit  longer 
to  the  monopolizing  and  tyrannical  rule  of  a  mere  corporation,  not 
made  for  them,  and  in  which  they  could  not,  in  the  usual  course  of 


SPEECH  AT  ELIOT.  ME.  599 

business,  become  participators,  without  changing  their  course  of  liveli- 
hood 7  I  cheerfully  admit  that  these  merchants,  and  manufacturers, 
and  mechanics,  if  not  owners  of  land,  could  not,  in  a  corporation 
made  to  manage  the  land,  exercise  properly  the  power  of  voting ;  but 
I  do  insist  that  if  that  corporation  is  converted  into  a  form  of  govern- 
ment to  regulate  the  civil  and  political  privileges  of  a  whole  people, 
they  all  ought  to  participate  in  that  government ;  and  if  it  has  not 
now  been  so  changed,  it  was  high  time  it  should  be,  and  its  exclusive 
corporate  powers  be  made  to  give  way  to  a  new  and  rational  constitu- 
tion of  government,  for  all  the  members  of  society  within  its  limits. 
As  members  of  that  society,  without  being  owners  of  land,  they  had 
interests  deep  and  wide  to  be  looked  after  and  governed.  They  had 
their  own  livelihoods  at  stake,  their  professions,  their  personal  prop- 
erty. They  had  families  and  dependants ;  and  in  such  a  society  a 
majority  of  the  whole  did  not  claim  to  sell  the  land  or  own  it,  because 
a  majority, —  but  they  desired  to  exercise  some  control  over  their 
own  interests,  to  be  participators  in  the  government,  and  proper  agents 
to  consult  as  to  their  own  affairs  in  political  life,  and  proper  guardians 
over  many  of  those  rights  and  relations  most  dear  to  a  freeman's 
heart. 

Such,  in  brief,  was  the  origin,  as  well  as  progress,  of  the  whole  con- 
troversy ;  and  for  attempting,  in  a  peaceful  and  orderly  manner,  such 
reasonable  changes,  violence  was  first  resorted  to  on  the  other  side  ; 
and  the  friends  of  free  suffrage,  for  standing  by  the  constitution  and 
seeking  to  discharge  the  duties  prescribed  by  a  majority,  were  over- 
awed by  the  General  Government,  denounced  as  insurgents,  and  by 
such  premature  interference  disheartened  and  disbanded,  and  their 
bodies  since  immured  in  dungeons  and  penitentiaries,  by  the  intoler- 
ants  and  their  friends,  who  now  ask  your  sanction  and  votes.  Yes, 
they  ask  your  support,  whose  feudal  oppressions  would  have  disfran- 
chised Hancock  or  Jefferson,  or  even  the  sainted  father  of  his  country, 
had  they  removed  to  Rhode  Island,  and  not  been  able  to  purchase  a 
share  in  a  mere  corporation  of  her  land-owners.  Not  that  these 
immortal  worthies  would  have  been  wanting  in  morals  or  intelligence, 
in  patriotism,  or  even  personal  property ;  but  only  that  they  did  not 
happen  to  own  one  seventy-thousandth  part  of  the  rocky  soil  of  her 
ancient  land  company.  That  alone  is  to  constitute  a  Divine  right  to 
rule.  That  is  paramount  to  every  virtue.  The  whole  of  the  mistakes 
on  this  subject  have  sprung  from  the  perversion  of  corporate  technicali- 
ties to  matters  of  free  government ;  and  when  the  most  talented,  use- 
ful, and  experienced,  have  requested  these  political  privileges,  without 
which  they  continue  slaves,  they  receive  a  stone  instead  of  bread. 
They  are  turned  over  to  a  base  and  soulless  corporation ;  and,  if  once 
becoming  members  of  it,  should  fire  and  floods  destroy  their  freeholds, 
they  are  again  forced-  back  to  political  degradation  and  chains.  The 
temper  which  power,  thus  aristocratically  monopolized,  is  likely  to 
engender,  was  developed  often  during  the  struggle  for  our  Revolution- 


600  SPEECH   AT   ELIOT,  ME. 

ary  liberties,  by  neglect  and  contempt  towards  the  requisitions  of  the 
old  Congress.  Our  fathers  had  to  lament  still  more  the  continuance 
of  it  when  the  constitution  of  the  General  Government  was  formed,  as 
Rhode  Island  neither  joined  in  the  convention  which  formed  it  nor 
assented  to  its  provisions,  till  Washington  himself  recommended  to 
Congress  to  pass  acts  treating  her  as  a  foreign  power,  shut  out  from 
the  glorious  sisterhood  of  the  Union.  Even  to  this  day,  on  the  public 
records  in  the  nation's  archives,  none  of  the  names  of  her  Solons  and 
Lycurguses,  her  Roger  Williamses,  or  Hopkinses,  or  Elleries,  appear 
in  the  proceedings  of  the  convention ;  and  the  frame  of  those  who 
formed  and  signed  the  great  charter  of  our  public  liberties  will  hang 
forever  with  one  blank,  like  that  for  the  recreant  Doge  of  Venice, — 
and  that  blank  will  represent,  to  the  end  of  time,  the  malign  influence 
of  the  Rhode  Island  land  company.  To  crown  all  this,  half  a  century 
more  of  such  exclusive  power  hardened  the  hearts  of  its  possessors,  so 
as  not  only  to  refuse  to  let  the  people  go  free,  but  to  pursue  their 
advocates  with  unrelenting  prosecutions,  prisons,  and  disgrace. 

Those  of  you,  if  any,  who  can  join  in  hosannas  to  the  authors  of  all 
this,  go  and  support  the  candidates  for  Presidency  and  Vice-presi- 
dency who  approve  it.  Go  with  them,  and,  if  consistent,  cooperate  in 
introducing  a  like  monarchical  spirit  into  the  other  States,  and  into  the 
government  of  our  glorious  Union.  But  those  who  disapprove  it, —  who 
prize  the  immortal  man  above  land, —  who  consider  the  social  affections 
and  character  and  intelligence  somewhat  higher  than  the  dross  of  earth, 
—  who  look  more,  in  public  affairs,  to  the  image  of  God,  to  mind  and 
soul,  than  to  clay  in  the  hands  of  political  potters,  and  regard  efforts 
for  improvement  and  freedom  and  progress  in  these  as  deserving  lau- 
rels, rather  than  penal  laws  and  penitentiaries, —  let  those  brand  such 
usurpations  and  abuses  of  power  indelibly,  and  shun  their  support  as 
something  worse  than  war,  pestilence,  and  famine, —  as  a  virtual  re-col- 
onization to  British  principles ! 

In  further  illustration  of  this  same  ambition  of  our  opponents  to 
increase  power  is  their  advocacy  of  a  national  bank.  The  constitu- 
tion, it  is  not  pretended,  gives  any  express  authority  to  regulate  the 
currency  or  the  exchanges,  or  to  pass  acts  of  incorporation  of  any 
kind  whatever ;  but  it  is  vindicated  by  them,  under  a  vagrant  con- 
struction, wandering  first  to  this  class  and  then  to  that,  till  retreating 
at  last  behind  that  apology  for  every  encroachment,  the  temporary  and 
fluctuating  opinions  of  a  temporary  and  fluctuating  majority  as  to  what 
might  promote  the  general  welfare.  One  of  the  leaders  on  our  oppo- 
nents' ticket  agreed  with  us  in  these  views,  till,  after  travelling  abroad 
towards  the  close  of  the  late  war,  he  came  back  with  such  loose  and 
dangerous  notions  on  this  subject  as  those  since  avowed  by  him. 

The  other  candidate  is.  as  thoroughly  committed  to  the  same  cor- 
rupt and  corrupting  institution ;  for,  though  not  its  feed  attorney,  he 
has  been  its  advocate  in  the  Senate,  and  his  speeches  in  its  favor, 
circulated  widely,  at  the  expense  of  its   stockholders,  by  the  very 


ME.  601 

Mr.  Biddle  whom  he  eulogized  as  being  calm  as  a  summer's 
morning,  though  surrounded  by  the  first  mutterings  of  that  storm 
which  afterwards  strewed  the  shores  of  both  continents  with  his  vic- 
tims. Let,  then,  that  odious  bank, —  the  notorious  corrupter  of  legis- 
lation, the  disturber  of  the  peace  and  commerce  of  the  whole  country, 
the  author  of  ruin  to  millions  by  its  unwarrantable  expansions  and 
contractions,  the  scourge  of  widows  and  orphans  who  had  confided 
their  all  to  its  trust  only  to  be  betrayed  and  lost, —  let  all  its  putrid 
taints  stick  to  them  and  their  party,  like  the  poisoned  shirt  of  Nessus. 
The  old  apologies  for  it  have,  by  subsequent  experience,  become 
flimsier  than  ever.  The  gentlemen  who  preceded  me  spoke  so  fully 
and  ably  on  this  subject,  that  little  remains  for  others.  Suffice  it  to 
say,  that  the  absurdity  of  vindicating  the  bank  as  constitutional,  under 
an  implication  that  it  is  necessary  and  proper  as  a  fiscal  machine  for 
the  government,  is  demonstrated  when  the  experience  of  the  last  ten 
years  has  proved  it  to  be  entirely  unnecessary  and  useless,  except  for 
evil.  And  the  folly  of  considering  such  an  institution  expedient,  even 
were  it  constitutional,  could  never  be  made  more  glaring,  after  their 
inability  even  to  reduce  the  exchanges  so  low  as  they  now  are,  or  to 
make  the  currency  better  than  it  now  is  ;  and  after  its  disastrous  losses 
of  thirty  millions  of  capital ;  its  capacity,  as  well  as  inclination,  to 
destroy  State  banks ;  its  liability,  in  war,  to  have  all  its  funds  wielded 
by  English  interests  and  agents,  if  not  actually  in  Threadneedle-street ; 
its  power,  as  a  party  machine,  through  immense  loans  to  members  of 
Congress,  as  well  as  other  partisans,  with  the  circulation  of  more  than 
three  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  copies  of  whig  speeches ;  and  last,  but 
not  least,  its  large  contractions  and  expansions,  virtually  making  every 
yard-stick  in  the  country  a  third  longer  or  shorter,  and  every  pound 
weight  a  third  heavier  or  lighter,  so  as  to  furnish  its  gambling  friends 
with  the  means  of  public  robbery  and  swindling  to  the  extent  of 
untold  millions. 

But  these  are  only  a  tithe  of  the  illustrations  which  could  be  adduced 
to  prove  the  inveterate  zeal  of  our  opponents  to  enlarge  the  powers  of 
the  General  Government,  by  new  constructions,  at  the  expense  of  the 
people  and  the  States.  Where  is  the  monstrous  extension  of  the 
bankrupt  system  to  classes  never  contemplated  by  our  fathers,  and  to 
past  as  well  as  future  contracts,  trenching  thus  on  vested  rights,  and 
absorbing  into  the  expensive  and  encroaching  jurisdiction  of  the  federal 
judiciary  the  whole  dealings  of  the  whole  community,  with  a  long  train 
of  irritating  injunctions  and  judicial  collisions  ?  Where  is  the  McLeod 
bill,  stripping  the  State  courts  of  all  power  to  protect  the  lives  and 
property  of  their  citizens,  when  some  incendiary  may  choose  to  plead 
the  command  of  any  foreign  power  1  Murder  may  stalk  abroad  on 
our  lake  frontier,  the  felon  torch  may  be  applied  to  our  steamers,  our 
sacred  soil  invaded,  and  our  citizens  and  property  hurried  in  flames 
over  the  cataract  of  Niagara,  and  yet  our  natural  avengers  against 
these  boastful  marauders,  when  once  in  our  power,  are  to  be  disarmed  at 
51 


602  SPEECH   AT   ELIOT,    ME. 

the  nod  of  foreign  menace  and  foreign  interference.  Where,  also,  are 
the  orders  issued  by  a  whig  Congress  to  their  masters,  the  sovereign 
States  and  people  of  the  Union,  to  make  districts  for  the  choice  of 
representatives  1 

The  domineering  and  encroaching  spirit  of  the  whole  shows  them  to 
have  sprung  from  one  common  parentage,  and  indicates  the  dangerous 
propensity  of  the  party  opposed  to  us  for  seizing  new  powers,  and 
stretching  old  ones  to  new  objects,  on  all  practicable  occasions,  rather 
than  condescend  to  resort  to  the  proper  sources  of  authority  for  new 
grants.  Another  reason  for  neglecting  such  a  resort  is,  doubtless,  a 
knowledge  that  the  grants  would  often  be  withheld ;  because  instruc- 
tions unfavorable  to  such  new  powers  again  and  again  are  accustomed 
to  emanate  from  these  sources,  and  are  issued  only  to  be  despised  and 
systematically  disobeyed  by  the  party  that  now  seeks  your  support. 

But  I  am  detaining  you  too  long,  as  other  gentlemen,  more  youthful 
and  spirited  than  myself,  are  waiting  to  speak.  One  other  evidence, 
then,  of  the  difference  of  the  two  parties  in  this  respect,  whose  candi- 
dates ask  your  votes.  It  is  involved  in  the  exciting  measure  of  the 
tariff.  The  very  object,  the  alpha  and  omega,  of  our  opponents,  in 
a  high  discriminating  tariff,  is  to  exercise  a  new  power.  It  is  not 
merely  to  raise  revenue,  which  is  the  power  granted  in  the  constitu- 
tion, but  it  is  to  protect  and  favor  particular  interests,  which  is  a 
power  not  .granted  in  the  constitution.  It  is  a  modern  innovation 
since  the  late  war,  in  order  to  stretch  legislative  authority  to  new  and 
doubtful  objects ;  so  doubtful  as,  in  1832,  after  convulsing  the  Union, 
to  have  been  abandoned  by  a  solemn  compromise ;  and  yet,  in  the 
face  of  all  this,  is  revived,  under  the  present  law,  with  all  its  oppres- 
sions and  odium.  We  not  only  resist  all  such  exercises  of  questiona- 
ble powers,  but  any  measure,  even  if  constitutional  in  form,  provided 
that,  like  this  tariff,  it  is  unequal  and  partial.  Choose,  then,  between 
us,  as  to  this.  We  go  for  the  spirit,  as  well  as  the  letter,  of  the  consti- 
tution,— to  impose  taxes  for  revenue,  and  treat  all  classes  alike.  They 
go  only,  by  a  broad  and  dangerous  construction,  to  effect  other  objects 
than  revenue,  and  these  for  the  benefit  of  a  favored  few.  We  wish  all 
taxation,  even  by  a  tariff,  to  be  low  ;  they  push  it  up,  even  on  some  of 
the  necessaries  of  life,  to  an  enormous  height,  and,  indeed,  beyond  that 
on  luxuries  themselves.  We  wish  imports  to  be  taxed,  as  much  as  any 
other  property,  for  the  support  of  government,  and  have  never  imposed 
a  direct  tax  on  land  in  time  of  peace  ;  while  they,  half  pretending  to 
the  contrary,  have  alone,  under  the  elder  Adams,  harassed  you  with 
direct  taxes  in  peace,  and,  by  their  extravagant  expenses  in  1842  and 
1843,  would  have  plunged  us  into  them  again,  if  they  had  not  resorted 
to  what  was  nearly  as  bad,  —  ruinous  loans  and  large  additions  to  the 
public  debt. 

I  would  here  leave  the  subject  of  the  tariff,  so  much  has  been  said 
in  explanation  of  it,  by  myself  and  others,  on  former  occasions,  had  it 
not  escaped  from  some  of  their  leaky  vessels  that  by  one  item  in  the 


603 

present  tariff  they  intended  to  work  wonders,  however  disconcerted  as 
to  others.  Indeed,  it  has  been  boasted,  that,  as  the  election  of  1840 
was  carried  by  coon-skins,  they  meant  to  carry  this  by  sheep-skins. 
You  will,  therefore,  excuse  me  for  detaining  you  a  few  moments  longer, 
by  stating  a  few  plain  and  unvarnished  facts,  that  may  enable  all 
honest  yeomanry  to  prevent  demagogues  from  pulling  wool  over  their 
eyes. 

In  the  first  place,  the  woollen  manufacturers,  as  a  class,  and  their 
whig  advocates,  have  always  opposed  raising  higher  the  duty  on  wool. 
This  has  been  for  the  obvious  reason,  that  the  higher  that  duty,  the 
more  the  raw  material  would  cost  them,  the  less  would  be  their  profits 
in  making  woollen  cloths  for  sale.  As  we  shall  soon  see,  the  whole 
body  of  manufacturers  never  want  a  higher  duty  on  anything  they 
buy,  as  they  never,  in  their  own  cases,  practise  on  the  practical  absurd- 
ity which  they  preach  to  mislead  you,  —  that  high  duties  make  low 
prices,  —  and  which  it  will  be  quite  as  difficult,  I  trust,  to  make  you 
believe,  as  that  the  more  toll  the  miller  takes  from  your  corn,  the  more 
will  be  left  for  you  to  carry  home.  What,  then,  has  been  the  real 
truth  as  to  the  imposition  of  what  duties  now  exist  on  wool  to  protect 
its  growers  ?  It  is,  that  the  raising  of  those  duties  was  moved  by 
democrats  in  1828  and  1841,  and  not  by  whigs ;  and  that  the  very 
increases  of  which  our  opponents  now  boast,  and  ask  favor  for,  were 
made,  not  by  them,  but  by  democratic  votes.  Here  are  the  yeas  and 
nays  in  the  Senate  of  which  I  speak,  taken  at  different  periods  from 
the  official  journals  ;  and  not  a  whig  is  among  the  former,  unless  one 
or  two  from  a  large  wool-growing  State  and  the  free- trade  region  of 
the  south. 

Most  of  the  new  guards  to  prevent  frauds  in  the  imports  of  foreign 
wool  were,  in  1841,  introduced  on  my  own  motion ;  and  when,  to 
secure  the  farming  interests  still  further  in  this  article,  and  give  them 
some  equality  with  the  manufacturer,  I  moved  to  raise  the  duty  on 
cheap  wool  to  the  average  standard  of  other  articles,  which  was  twenty 
per  cent.,  the  motion  was  talked  down  and  voted  down  by  the  whigs. 

Again,  in  1842,  who  said  yea  to  the  raising  the  duty  on  the  same 
kind  of  wool,  from  the  mere  bagatelle  of  five  per  cent.,  to  a  higher  and 
more  equal  rate  ?  Democrats  throughout,  and  only  two  whigs  of  the 
whole  body.  Here  are  the  names,  that  all  may  decide  for  themselves, 
who  wish  to  examine  them. 

I  have  had  it  cast  in  my  teeth,  as  a  reproach,  in  the  Senate,  within 
two  years,  by  the  whig  friends  of  the  manufacturer,  that,  in  1828,  no 
less  than  in  1843,  I  desired  to  increase  the  duty  on  wool  to  the  disad- 
vantage of  the  manufacturers,  when  in  truth  it  was  for  the  equal  pro- 
tection of  the  farmers.  And  yet  these  sheep-skin  demagogues  would 
now  try  to  pull  wool  over  your  eyes,  and  make  you  believe  that  I  anus 
your  enemy,  and  they  your  exclusive  friends,  in  imposing  that  very 
duty.  But,  after  all  which  could  by  the  democrats  be  got  incorpo- 
rated into  the  present  oppressive  tariff  for  your  relief,  does  it  deal 


604  SPEECH   AT   ELIOT,    ME. 

justly  and  fairly  by  you  even  as  to  wool,  and  much  less  as  to  numer- 
ous other  articles  1  Let  me  point  you  to  recorded  facts,  and  not  gen- 
eral tirades.  On  all  wool  worth  above  seven  cents  per  pound,  the  duty 
is  but  three  cents  per  pound,  and  thirty  per  cent,  more  on  the  value  ; 
and  on  all  under  that  value,  but  five  per  cent.  Now,  if  wool  of  the 
first  class  averages  fifty  cents'  value  per  pound,  the  whole  duty  on  that 
would  be  almost  thirty-six  per  cent.,  on  an  average.  Thus  their  boasted 
aid  to  the  farmer  on  his  wool,  and  that  forced  from  them  by  democratic 
votes,  is  only  five  per  cent,  on  one  class,  and  thirty-six  per  cent,  on 
another.  But  what  think  you  they  have  the  impudence  to  demand  for 
themselves,  as  aid  and  protection  on  the  articles — the  cloths  and  carpets 
—  made  from  this  very  wool  7  Not  the  same  impost  of  five  to  thirty- 
six,  but  what  ranges  from  twenty-eight  to  sixty  per  cent.  This  is  only 
one  sample  among  many  of  the  miserable  farces  they  seek  to  play,  in 
this  tariff,  on  the  farming  interest.  If  they  give  to  others  half  a  dollar, 
they  extort,  in  return,  for  themselves,  a  dollar  and  a  half;  and  thus  they 
thwart  all  the  benefits  you  might  otherwise  realize,  and  make  you 
yearly  poorer,  unless  you  work  harder  and  spend  less,  while  they 
yearly  grow  richer  on  your  earnings,  and  on  your  forced  contributions 
to  sustain  their  business.  Just  run  through  the  parallel  in  a  few  other 
articles,  and  see  how  miserably  your  productions  are  encouraged  or 
protected,  in  comparison  with  theirs  —  thus  : 

To  you,  upon  wool,  5  to  36  per  cent. ;  and  to  them,  on  woollens, 
28  to  60  per  cent.  To  you,  on  hides,  but  5 ;  to  them,  on  leather,  35, 
or  more,  on  an  average.  To  you,  on  hemp,  30 ;  to  them,  on  cordage, 
100  to  130.  To  you,  on  flax,  7  to  9  ;  to  them,  on  linen,  &c,  25  to 
50.  To  you,  on  silk,  cocoons,  50  cents  per  pound  ;  to  them,  on  silk, 
manufactured,  $2.50  per  pound.  To  you,  on  tobacco,  20  per  cent. ; 
to  th*em,  on  tobacco,  manufactured,  100  per  cent.,  or  more.  To  you, 
on  wood,  20  per  cent. ;  to  them,  on  wood,  manufactured,  30  per  cent. 

This  list  could  be  extended,  if  necessary,  to  show  the  kind  of  pro- 
tection yielded  by  the  present  tariff  to  farmers,  compared  with  manu- 
facturers, and  proving  that  where  a  duty  is  imposed  on  the  products 
which  reward  the  farmers,  another,  three-fold  to  seven-fold,  is  forthwith 
exacted  from  them  to  aid  the  manufacturers,  on  the  article  made  from 
your  raw  material. 

Hence,  if  anything  of  agricultural  origin  has  risen  a  few  cents  per 
pound  since  the  tariff,  like  wool,  the  cloths  made  from  it,  and  to  be 
taken  by  the  farmer  in  exchange,  have  risen  still  more;  and  the  farmer 
is  made  much  worse,  instead  of  better,  by  the  whole  operation.  But, 
in  most  things  grown  among  us, —  in  the  great  staples  of  wheat,  corn, 
flour,  pork,  beef,  tobacco,  butter,  and  cheese, —  there  has  been  a  decided 
fall  in  price,  under  this  boasted  whig  tariff,  while  in  most  that  the 
laboring  classes  must  buy  or  take  in  exchange  there  has  been  a  decided 
rise  in  price.  In  this  way  the  farmer's  candle  is  burning  out  rapidly 
at  both  ends;  while  the  manufacturer's  is  growing  longer  at  both  ends, 
by  giving  less  for  the  flour,  beef,  and  pork,  he  consumes,  and  getting 


605 

more  for  the  cloth  he  sells.  Again,  generally,  when  the  agricultural 
product  obtains  any  protective  duty,  —  5  to  36  per  cent,  —  the 
favored  manufacturer  of  cotton  gets  100  to  130  ;  of  cordage,  120  or 
more  ;  of  paper,  100  ;  of  iron,  80 ;  and  of  salt  and  sugar,  also  great 
necessaries  of  life,  80  or  more,  according  to  the  cost. 

Look  a  moment  to  the  great  contrast  of  this  system  towards  your- 
selves and  the  manufacturers  in  another  aspect.  The  manufacturer  is 
an  advocate  for  low  duties,  or  no  duties  whatever,  on  articles  where  he 
is  to  consume  much  of  them.  Then  the  principles  of  absolute  and 
unqualified  free  trade  are  with  him  not  merely  a  beautiful  abstraction, 
but  a  blessed  reality.  His  dye-woods  are  imported  free,  his  indigo 
and  madder  and  kelp,  his  saltpetre  and  barilla  and  brimstone,  his 
models  of  machinery,  and  tartar, — all,  and  much  more,  are  brought 
from  abroad  entirely  free ;  and  his  foreign  wool,  if  cheap,  paying  but 
a  nominal  tax.  So  of  his  linseed  and  flax,  his  hides  and  rags  and 
bristles,  with  much  more  of  raw  material,  scarcely  reaching  a  revenue 
standard. 

But  your  raw  materials  for  your  agriculture,  and  ship-building,  and 
lumbering,  —  the  iron,  and  salt,  and  cordage,  and  duck,  with  various 
other  necessaries  of  life,  —  are  taxed  enormously.  While  he  has  free 
trade  for  his  articles,  and  you  not  for  yours,  and  thus  acknowledges 
the  excellence  of  the  free-trade  system  for  what  he  consumes,  he  uses 
insulting  mockery  to  justify  it.  Yes,  you  are  to  be  forced  by  him  to 
pay  the  highest  taxes  on  foreign  manufactures,  so  as  to  protect  Amer- 
ican labor  and  domestic  industry  against  the  derided  pauper  labor  of 
Europe,  while  he  refuses  to  protect  your  American  labor  and  industry 
by  equally  high  duties  on  all  foreign  raw  materials ;  on  lumber,  fish, 
cord-wood,  potatoes,  hides,  cheap  wool,  and  many  other  products  of 
what  they  call  the  pauper  labor  of  the  rest  of  the  world,  but  which 
they  are  very  willing  to  profit  by  themselves,  when  cheaper  than  ours. 
It  is  no  answer  to  this  that  a  higher  duty  is  imposed  on  several  other 
agricultural  products,  when  imported,  than  on  wool  ;  because  these 
others  seldom  or  never  are  imported.  They  cannot  be  aifected  by 
imports  here  under  any  duty,  and  it  is  throwing  dust  in  your  eyes  to 
talk  about  the  protection  to  them,  as  much  as  it  would  be  to  put  a 
high  duty  on  hay,  or  ice,  or  rocks,  and  talk  of  that  as  giving  protec- 
tion to  northern  farmers.  We  all  know  that  few,  if  any,  of  these  arti- 
cles, can  ever  be  profitably  imported  from  abroad.  As  conclusive 
evidence  that  the  system  has  been  prejudicial  to  agriculture,  almost 
every  product  of  it  has  become  lower  since  than  before  the  tariff ;  and 
that  it  has  been  beneficial,  as  intended,  to  manufacturers,  all  their  lead- 
ing fabrics  have  risen.  The  new  home  market  it  was  to  furnish  you 
—  so  praised  to  the  skies  —  turns  out,  therefore,  to  be  one  where  you 
must  sell  for  less  and  buy  for  more. 

Here  is  a  schedule  of  the  prices  in  New  York,  before  and  since,  on 
several  articles  of  agricultural  growth  : 
51* 


606 


SPEECH   AT 

ELIOT,    ME. 

1S36. 

1839. 

,     1844. 

Beef, 

$9.87  to  10.75 

$15.00  to  0.00 

$5.25 

Pork, 

..■-   17.69  to  18.00 

23.00  to  0.00 

8.75 

Flour, 

7.00  to    8.00 

6.75  to  8.69 

4.37 

Wool, 

.35  to      .40 

.55  to     .60 

.40 

Corn, 

.43  to      .85 

.76  to    .80 

.56 

Cheese, 

.06  to      .09 

.08  to     .10 

.05 

All  know  the  advance  in  manufactures.  Since  the  passage  of  the 
bill,  some  kinds  of  cotton  cloths  have  risen  near  fifty  per  cent.,  and 
most  of  them  twenty. 

Besides  this,  with  these  prices  near  a  third  lower  on  farming  pro- 
ductions, you  have  to  pay  the  tax-gatherer,  the  collector,  a  duty  nom- 
inally as  high  in  most  cases,  and  in  some  higher,  than  in  1828.  This 
makes  the  tax,  in  truth,  operate  one-third  higher  to  the  farming 
interest.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  made  to  yield  eight  to  ten  per  cent, 
more  protection  to  manufacturers  where  nominally  the  same,  as  it  is 
paid  in  cash  now,  without  the  credit  formerly  allowed. 

The  profits  realized  by  high  duties  on  most  manufactures  go  also  to 
capitalists,  rather  than  the  operatives.  They  swell  the  dividends  on 
capital,  but  do  not  enhance  the  workman's  wages.  So  they  aid  the 
great  branches  of  business  by  corporations,  and  not  the  business  of 
common  mechanics,  transacted  on  a  smaller  scale.  Such  mechanics  are 
victims  of  this  system,  rather  than  profiting  by  it.  I  appeal  to  them, 
and  all  the  household  manufacturers,  against  its  oppressions,  by  taxing 
so  highly  many  of  the  great  necessaries  of  life  which  they  consume. 
All  mechanics,  under  it,  are  compelled  to  pay  more  for  their  iron,  their 
leather  and  cordage,  their  sugar  and  salt,  as  well 'as  the  tools  of  their 
trade ;  and,  if  not  makers  of  cloth,  much  more  for  all  worn  than  they 
would  for  high  duties.  Nor  is  there  any  escape  from  this,  unless  they 
and  their  families  rebarbarize,  and,  like  the  Esquimaux  Indians,  dress 
in  nothing  but  skins. 

Beside  that,  the  shoemaker,  and  hatter,  and  blacksmith,  and  tanner, 
have  grown  up  under  free  competition,  and  always  will  grow  up  in 
that  way,  and  prosper  in  communities  like  ours,  whether  tariffs  rise  or 
fall.  They  were  as  successful  under  Washington  and  Jefferson's 
administration,  with  mere  revenue  duties,  seldom  equalling  twenty  per 
cent.,  as  they  ever  have  been  since;  and  their  occupations  are  of  a 
character  almost  to  bid  defiance  to  political  legislation  of  any  kind. 
We  import,  and  ever  shall,  but  little  of  the  work  of  either  of  them, 
even  when  the  tariff  is  low ;  and  it  is  as  delusive  to  attempt  to  make 
such  mechanics  believe  they  would  be  injured  without  a  high  tariff,  as 
it  would  be  to  convince  the  shipper  of  ice  from  the  Kennebec,  or  the 
hewer  of  granite  on  the  Penobscot  and  the  Merrimac,  that  they  want 
a  high  tariff  to  protect  the  growth  of  what  they  deal  in. 

But,  not  to  consume  more  of  your  time  on  such  general  considera- 
tions, look  a  moment  at  the  manner  in  which  this  high  tariff  is  made 
to  bear  on  the  chief  productions  of  Maine  as  a  State,  even  in  connec- 


607 

tion  with  the  boasted  article  of  wool.  Your  population  equals  about 
one-thirty-fourth  that  of  the  whole  Union.  The  articles  which  you 
produce  in  a  larger  ratio  than  that,  or  above  your  average  amount,  are, 
of  course,  those  in  which  your  interest  must  be  considered  most  peculiar 
and  deep.  They  are  ships  built  equalling  one-third  of  the  whole  in  the 
Union ;  lumber,  near  one-sixth ;  ships  employed  in  navigation,  in  ton- 
nage, one-seventh ;  potatoes,  about  one-tenth ;  fisheries,  men  engaged, 
one-tenth;  wood  (cord),  one-twenty-fifth;  and  sheep,  but  one-thirtieth, 
though  made  in  this  canvass  to  take  so  prominent  a  stand.  Our  oppo- 
nents cry  ivool,  wool,  wool,  as  loudly  as  Patrick  Henry's  tory  antag- 
onist did  beef,  beef,  when  it  is  only  a  drop  in  the  ocean  compared  to 
your  other  interests,  and  when  those  interests  are  so  shamefully  neg- 
lected. The  average  duties  of  the  whole  tariff  exceed  thirty-seven  per 
cent.,  and  the  highest  duties  range  from  fifty  to  one  hundred  and 
thirty  per  cent. :  making  the  direct  average  duty,  when  imposed  for 
protection,  and  not  revenue  alone,  quite  seventy  per  cent.  In 
calculating  a  moment  how  you  fare  under  this  system,  and  what  cause 
your  great  productions  have  to  bless  it  and  its  friends  for  encourage- 
ment, look  first  to  your  ships  built  yearly.  They  are  taxed  highly, 
instead  of  favored,  by  this  new  tariff, —  are  burdened  to  the  amount  of 
five  dollars  per  ton  above  a  revenue  duty,  or  tA\o  hundred  thousand 
dollars  a  year,  in  prosperous  times,  in  your  State  alone.  Next  your 
ships  owned  are  to  be  replaced  and  repaired  under  a  like  discriminat- 
ing tax  against  you  for  your  tonnage;  which  tax,  on  what  is  now 
used  by  you,  exceeds  a  million  and  a  half  of  dollars  —  besides  suffer- 
ing, on  all  the  clothes  worn,  and  tools  used,  and  salt  and  sugar 
consumed,  by  those  employed  in  and  on  your  vessels,  an  increase  of 
taxation  from  two  to  three  hundred  per  cent,  over  twenty,  the  former 
revenue  standard.  This  is  the  new  kindness  by  the  new  tariff  to  your 
first  and  greatest  interest,  the  navigation  of  the  east, —  that  interest 
which  sustained  the  brave  men  who  bled  in  every  sea  during  the  late 
war  with  haughty  England  in  defence  of  free  trade  and  sailors1 
rights  ;  and  who,  since  and  evermore,  can  know  no  patriotic  cry,  but 
freedom  of  the  seas,  as  opposed  to  the  proud  claim  of  dominion  of 
the  seas  set  up  by  those  who  constantly  deafen  our  ears  with  British 
magnanimity  and  British  power. 

Which  of  your  interests  is  next  in  magnitude,  compared  with  other 
States?  Lumber.  That  product  is  near  two  millions  yearly,  in 
Maine  alone,  —  double  all  the  income  of  all  the  sheep  in  your  State. 

I  go  for  facts  and  not  speculations,  and  take  my  data  as  to  your 
products  from  the  census  itself.  And  how  is  this  lumber  protected, 
compared  with  cotton?  Only  twenty  per  cent.,  instead  of  eighty  to 
one  hundred  and  twenty.  How,  compared  with  the  average  of  all 
protected  articles?  Only  twenty  per  cent.,  instead  of  seventy, —  or 
not  one-thirtieth  so  much.  Indeed,  it  is  protected  a  little  over  half 
as  much  as  the  average  duty  of  the  whole  of  this  eulogized  tariff. 

How  stands  your  next  article  in  importance, —  potatoes, —  equalling 


608  SPEECH   AT   ELIOT,   ME. 

one-tenth  of  all  grown  in  the  Union,  while  your  wool  is  only  one- 
thirtieth  ?  This  is  higher,  though  not  much  of  it  imported ;  the  whole 
brought  from  abroad  being  a  very  small-potato  concern.  But  even 
this  duty  is,  on  an  average  of  years,  only  thirty  to  fifty  per  cent. ; 
while,  on  the  other  protected  articles,  the  average  is  quite  seventy  per 
cent. 

Next,  as  to  your  fisheries.  The  old  drawback  allowed  to  them  from 
the  foundation  of  the  government  was  predicated  on  a  scale  of  duties  on 
iron,  salt,  duck,  and  cordage,  far  less  than  it  is  now ;  and  while,  under 
the  new  tariff,  each  fishing  vessel  is  made  to  cost  five  dollars  per  ton 
more  than  it  would  under  mere  revenue  duties,  the  drawback  is  not 
increased  a  single  dollar.  Thus  the  adventurous  fishermen  of  the 
United  States, —  of  whom  you  have  one-tenth  in  the  whole  Union, — 
who  brave  storms,  fogs  and  icebergs,  for  a  livelihood,  man  our  com- 
mercial marine,  and  sustain  the  flag  of  our  navy  under  every  peril 
and  in  every  sea. — they  are  selected  for  a  new  tax  on  all  their  humble 
vessels  by  this  wretched  whig  tariff,  in  order  to  help  the  manufactur- 
ers of  iron,  and  duck,  and  cordage,  at  their  suffering  and  cost.  Nor 
are  their  fish  themselves  protected  by  a  duty  beyond  what  usually 
exceeds  twenty  to  twenty-five  per  cent,  in  their  value,  instead  of 
seventy,  the  protecting  average ;  and  their  fresh  fish,  the  beautiful 
salmon  of  your  beautiful  bays  and  rivers,  are  left  without  the  slightest 
shield  against  the  competition  of  your  near  British  neighbors,  who, 
clothing  them  in  ice,  penetrate  with  them  every  sea-port  of  the  Union. 
Neglected  as  this  hardy  class  of  individuals  is,  compared  wTith  the  lords 
of  the  spindle,  yet  the  census  shows  that  those  engaged  in  the 
fisheries,  with  their  families,  are  three  or  four  to  one  of  all  employed 
in  Maine  in  cotton  factories. 

So  the  farmer's  cord- wood,  —  which  in  your  State  constitutes  one- 
twenty-fifth  of  the  whole  Union,  a  larger  proportion  than  wool  itself, 
—  it  is  protected  by  only  the  small  duty  of  twenty  per  cent.,  instead 
of  the  seventy,  as  an  average  allowed  to  most  manufactured  goods. 

For  this  glaring  neglect,  which  brings  swarms  of  New  Brunswick 
and  Nova  Scotia  coasters  with  wood  into  every  northern  sea-port,  to 
your  exclusion,  —  for  this  want  of  equal  and  proportionate  favor  to 
your  other  great  articles,  by  the  whig  tariff, —  you  are  invoked  to  sus- 
tain the  whig  candidates,  as  well  as  such  oppressive  whig  measures. 
But  that  invocation  will  be  in  vain,  if  facts  and  common  sense  have 
not  abandoned  us,  and  been  driven  to  the  tombs,  by  bold  assertion, 
noisy  fallacies,  coarse  songs,  dumb  shows,  and  the  orgies  of  hard  cider. 

And  if  vjool  is  again  appealed  to,  as  having  a  higher  duty  than  some 
of  the  others,  see,  as  already  stated,  who  voted  for  and  who  against  it, 
— who  tried  to  increase  it,  and  who  opposed.  See,  too,  that  the  rate  is 
only  five  per  cent,  on  some  and  but  thirty -six  on  other  kinds  of  wool, 
when  the  average  in  the  tariff  on  protected  articles  is  seventy  per  cent. 
See,  too,  that  you  raise  not  so  much  of  it  as  you  consume  within  your 
own  State,  by  many  thousands  of  pounds.     By  reason  of  a  colder 


me.  609 

climate,  you  use  in  all  ways  more  wool  and  woollens,  on  an  average, 
than  the  same  number  of  persons  further  south ;  and  yet  the  amount 
of  wool  you  raise  very  little  exceeds  the  average  for  the  whole  Union. 
As  the  country  then  imported,  the  very  first  year,  under  this  new 
tariff,  near  five  millions  of  pounds  of  raw  wool,  and  several  millions  of 
dollars'  worth  of  woollen  cloths,  of  which  your  people  required  more 
than  a  full  proportion  to  their  population,  look  at  the  facts,  and  tell  me 
if  the  high  tariff  on  wool  and  woollens  be  not  a  grievous  tax  on  your 
State,  as  a  State,  rather  than  a  blessing?  If  the  individual  who 
happens  to  grow  more  of  the  raw  material  than  he  consumes  in  all 
ways  in  his  family  gets  a  trifle  more  per  pound  by  means  of  the  duty, 
—  as  I  admit  he  may,  —  how  does  the  tariff  stand,  even  with  him,  as  a 
whole,  when,  for  the  salt,  iron,  and  sugar,  he  gets  in  exchange  or  buys 
with  the  proceeds,  he  is  compelled  to  pay  at  least  double  the  amount 
in  advance,  by  duties,  which  he  procures  on  his  wool  1 

The  whole  pretence,  then,  of  benefit  to  you,  by  the  system,  as  a  sys- 
tem, is  delusive.  And  think,  a  single  moment,  in  conclusion  on  this, 
as  to  the  whole  country, — that  if  the  eight  millions'  worth  of  wool  raised 
in  the  Union  was  benefited  a  little  by  the  duty,  what  a  miserable  kind 
of  aid  it  must  be,  when  five  hundred  millions  in  value  of  other  agricul- 
tural products  are  taxed  at  a  double  rate  of  duty  on  all  the  clothing, 
iron,  salt,  sugar  and  numerous  other  articles,  consumed  by  those  who 
raise  them,  and  reckon,  if  the  farming  interest  get  a  protective  duty  on 
all  their  wool  equal  in  the  aggregate,  yearly,  to  a  third  of  a  million  of 
dollars,  they  are  obliged  to  pay  a  protective  duty  on  other  articles, 
something  like  twelve  or  fourteen  millions, —  or  near  forty  times  the 
amount  they  obtain  on  wool. 

Again,  the  monopolizing  spirit  of  our  opponents  would  not  even  dis- 
criminate, so  as  to  let  ordinary  articles  of  the  same  name,  but  used  by 
the  working  classes,  pay  less  than  the  finer  and  richer  ones  used  by 
the  wealthy.  And  hence  the  coarse  shoe,  the  coarse  flannel,  the 
coarse  carpet,  and  coarse  cloth  of  almost  every  kind,  are  taxed  as  high, 
by  specific  duties,  as  the  finest,  costing  fifty  or  one  hundred  per  cent, 
more.  Even  the  farmer's  wife  and  daughter,  or  the  mechanic's,  or 
the  fisherman's,  are  compelled,  if  aspiring  by  extra  labor  and  saving  to 
buy  a  durable  cheap  silk  for  wear  on  Sunday  or  holidays,  to  pay  the 
same  amount  of  duty  on  it  as  is  paid  on  more  expensive  silks  by  the 
most  extravagant  belle  in  Broadway,  or  Chestnut-street,  or  the  fami- 
lies of  the  wealthiest  nabobs  in  Boston  or  Baltimore.  Nor  is  this 
accidental.  On  the  passage  of  the  bill,  its  injustice  was  exposed,  and 
motions  made  to  amend  it  by  democrats,  but  voted  down  by  whigs. 
The  great  question  naturally  occurs,  when  so  much  is  said  in  vindica- 
tion of  a  tariff  for  protection,  why  it  is,  in  your  agricultural  and  com- 
mercial State,  that  four  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  farmers,  mer- 
chants, and  seamen,  including  their  families,  should  be  taxed  highly 
on  all  the  manufactures  they  wear,  or  eat,  or  use,  and  be  unprotected 
in  all  their  great  staples  and  employments  by  anything  like  one-half 


610 

the  average  protecting  standard  for  others  1  Why  neglect  the  half- 
million  to  build  up  and  maintain  in  luxury  only  21,879  individuals, 
who,  by  the  late  census,  are  engaged  in  your  manufacturing  estab- 
lishments 1  If  any  are  to  exult  in  such  a  departure  from  equal 
principles,  let  it  be  those,  certainly,  who  win,  who  profit,  by  the  tariff. 
But  let  not  those  who  are  fleeced  and  trodden  down  by  any  political 
oppression  have  the  unearthly  meekness  and  humility  to  kiss  the  hand 
that  smites  them,  and  reward  it  by  renewed  votes  and  confidence. 

A  part  of  the  view  of  this  whole  restrictive  system  is,  that,  though 
some  branches  of  business  may  be  temporarily  aided  or  built  up  by  it, 
the  result  is  accomplished  on  unequal  and  anti-republican  principles. 
It  is  sustained  at  the  expense  of  others.  It  is,  then,  an  almshouse  or 
pauper  system.  In  the  end,  too,  the  whole  community  are  seldom 
gainers  by  it ;  because,  the  business  being  forced,  unnatural,  hazardous, 
and  fluctuating,  the  losses  by  the  many  counterbalance  any  profits  by 
a  few.  Thus,  since  1820,  in  New  England,  though  the  manufactur- 
ing population  has  increased  from  81,922  to  187,215,  those  engaged 
in  commerce  have  been  forced  to  fall  off  near  one-third ;  and  this 
though  commerce  and  the  fisheries  are  as  natural  to  our  people  as  air 
and  water,  and  their  tastes  on  such  an  extensive  sea-coast  become 
almost  amphibious. 

This  was  not  the  promise  made  in  the  infancy  of  the  system. 
Then,  such  high  protection  needed  not  to  be  beyond  a  few  years  — 
beyond  the  cradle  and  leading-strings.  But,  after  a  quarter  of  a  cen- 
tury, the  cry  is  still  louder,  and  for  protection  still  higher, —  like  the 
daughters  of  the  horse-leech  —  give,  give,  give!  And,  what  proves 
the  fallacy  of  the  whole  system,  the  statistical  returns  of  our  commerce 
exhibit  the  astounding  result,  that  where  the  duties  have  been  the  very 
highest,  the  domestic  supplies  cannot  be  forced  up  thus  unnaturally  to 
meet  such  a  proportion  of  our  demands  as  they  did  a  generation  ago. 
Our  population,  rapidly  as  it  increases,  doubles  only  in  about  thirty 
years ;  yet,  in  all  the  progress  of  manufactures  during  the  last  twenty, 
the  great  hot-bed  ones  have  not  increased  so  as  to  furnish  the  old 
wants,  nor  scarcely  half  the  new  ones.  Thus  the  sugars  needed  from 
abroad  in  1821  were  worth  $3,553,582;  but  in  1841,  instead  of  needing 
less  from  abroad  on  account  of  the  greatly  protected  growth  of  it  here, 
we  imported  more  than  double  the  value,  being  $8,798,037,  and  under 
fuller  prices  probably  quite  treble  the  quantity.  So  of  iron :  in  1821, 
we  imported  $1,868,529  in  value;  and  in  1841,  instead  of  home  pro- 
duction supplying  under  this  hot-house  system  our  old  as  well  as  new 
wants,  we  imported  $4,225,960  in  value,  and  perhaps  quadruple  the 
number  of  pounds.  And  even  cottons,  imported  in  1821  to  the 
extent  of  $7,589,791  only,  but  in  1842  $11,657,036  worth,  under 
prices  reduced  perhaps  fifty  per  cent. 

Make  any  fair  allowances  for  the  new  uses  of  these  articles,  and  if, 
after  twenty  years,  when  so  highly  protected,  they  are  not  yet  estab- 
lished so  as  to  supply  as  large  a  portion  of  our  wants  as  formerly, —  if 


ME.  611 

they  need  as  much  or  more  nursing  and  indulgence  in  caudle  and 
arrow-root  as  at  first, — if  the  home  market,  so  much  eulogized,  which 
they  furnish  to  agriculture,  is  one  of  lower  prices  for  most  of  its 
products,  and  leaving  a  still  larger  and  larger  surplus  to  find  buyers 
abroad,  or  rot  on  our  hands,  —  as  is  the  recorded  and  official  truth,  — 
pray  tell  me,  what  has  become  of  all  the  foundation-stones  on  which 
the  system  was  grounded  1  It  may  be  asked,  how  does  this  happen  1 
Use  your  eyes  to  see,  not  jaundiced,  —  your  ears  to  hear  facts  and 
reasons,  not  sophistry  and  selfish  glosses,  — use  a  little  plain,  practical 
common  sense, —  and  the  causes  cannot  be  mistaken.  Because  our 
natural  pursuits  for  the  present,  as  a  nation,  are  agriculture  and  com- 
merce, and  household  manufacture ;  and  what  is  forced  must  continue 
to  be  forced,  unless  the  circumstances  of  the  country  change  so  as  to 
render  it  natural.  But  the  ocean,  lakes,  and  rivers,  are  not  dried  up, 
and  will  not  dry  up,  so  as  to  make  commerce  impracticable ;  the  fisher- 
ies —  the  cod,  whales,  mackerel  —  still  multiply ;  the  new  and  fertile 
and  cheap  soils  are  not  all  cultivated. 

While,  then,  we  can  get,  for  wheat  and  pork  and  beef,  the  same 
price  as  other  nations  get  in  the  markets  of  the  world,  and  raise  them 
on  lands  costing  not  one-tenth  as  much  as  theirs,  is  not  agriculture 
our  most  natural  and  profitable  business,  and  commerce  its  most  use- 
ful handmaid,  for  exchanging  the  surplus  1  And  why  should  we  seek, 
by  unequal,  oppressive  legislation,  to  force  other  kinds  of  business,  to 
the  injury  of  those  fl  I  have  neither  interest  nor  other  motives  to  mis- 
lead you  as  to  these  great  branches  of  industry,  being  somewhat  con- 
nected with  manufactures,  as  well  as  agriculture.  Nor  are  you  in  a 
position  to  wish  or  seek  injustice  to  any  honest  employment ;  as  this 
immense  audience,  when  in  their  quiet  homes,  live  in  a  position  to 
weigh  this  subject  very  dispassionately,  being  surrounded  by  persons 
engaged  in  agriculture  and  commerce,  as  well  as  manufactures,  or  are 
themselves  devoted  in  part  to  all  of  them. 

There,  a  few  miles  only  southward  of  us,  swells  the  Atlantic  Ocean, 
over  which  you  and  your  sons  help  to  transport  the  products  and  mer- 
chandise of  every  zone,  and  from  whose  depths  they  assist  to  fish  up 
food,  comfort,  and  wealth.  There,  more  northward,  strike  the  eye  the 
blue  ridges  of  those  mountains  on  whose  hill-sides  your  cattle  graz6,  and 
your  ploughs  run  for  bread  to  the  very  summit.  And  on  the  water- 
falls of  the  river  near  you,  both  east  and  west, — the  Saco  and  Piscata- 
qua, — the  hum  of  the  spindle  almost  reaches  our  ears. 

All  which  you  or  I,  then,  can  reasonably  ask,  is  just  protection  to 
ail  these  interests ;  not  partial  favor  to  one  branch  of  American  labor, 
or  industry,  or  capital,  but  impartial  to  all.  And  the  only  true  Amer- 
ican system  is  to  demand  impartiality  and  equality,  and  insist  on  the 
justice  of  them,  though  the  heavens  fall. 

But  this  system  keeps  money  in  the  country,  cry  out  some  of  its  advo- 
cates, as  a  last  argument.  So  would  robbery  of  one  to  enrich  another. 
It  keeps  money,  I  grant,  in  the  pockets  of  the  manufacturers  of  the 


612  SPEECH   AT   ELIOT,  ME. 

country,  but  not  of  the  farmers.  Yes,  it  keeps  the  money  here,  at 
first,  of  those  obliged  to  buy  the  manufactured  article ;  but  sends  it 
abroad  afterwards,  by  the  manufacturer  himself,  for  the  raw  agricul- 
tural material  of  which  it  is  made.  Under  it,  to  be  sure,  the  farmer 
must  keep  his  money  in  the  country,  and  not  send  it  abroad  for  cloth- 
ing, salt,  and  iron ;  but  the  manufacturer  is  at  liberty  to  send  his  even 
to  Botany  Bay  for  wool,  and  Buenos  Ayres  or  California  for  hides,  or 
the  Mahometan  Turk  for  dyes,  or  the  Pope  for  rags  or  sulphur.  In 
truth,  this  system  does  not  keep  so  much  money  in  the  country,  as  a 
whole,  as  would  otherwise  remain  here,  on  the  sound  principles  of  free 
trade.  For,  in  that  case,  all  would  buy  where  what  they  need  is  made 
cheapest,  and  sell  where  what  they  spare  will  bring  most ;  and  in  this 
way  we  should  have  and  keep  much  more  money  in  the  country  at  the 
end  of  each  year.  Our  tariff  being  lower,  foreign  ones  become  so ; 
and,  getting  ten  millions  more  for  our  products,  and  buying  our  man- 
ufactures ten  millions  lower,  we  should,  as  a  nation,  manifestly  be 
twenty  millions  richer  at  the  end  of  the  year,  and  all  our  population 
would  be  as  much  employed  in  what  is  American  and  patriotic  as 
before.  Should  we  need  all  for  revenue  we  now  get,  nearly  the  same 
revenue  would  be  collected,  in  a  series  of  years,  on  a  duty  a  third 
lower,  because  so  much  more  would  be  imported,  and  so  little  smuggled. 
It  does  not  answer,  on  this  subject,  to  be  advocates  of  low  duties,  or 
free-trade  principles,  on  everything  but  iron,  like  one  State ;  or  all  but 
sugar,  like  another ;  or  all,  even  pauper  labor,  but  cottons,  like  another; 
or  all  but  wool,  like  another ;  or,  as  the  Scotchman  desired,  on  every- 
thing except  his  red  herring.  This  is  partial,  and  full  of  log-rolling 
coalition.  Rather  must  we  go  for  equal  protection  to  all  things  not 
foreign,  by  imposing  equal  and  moderate  duties  on  all ;  and  which 
wTould  thus  decidedly  assist  the  treasury,  and  yield  incidental  favor  to 
the  industry  and  labor  of  all  classes  equally  against  foreign  compe- 
tition. But  this  partial  tariff, —  why  should  you  admire  and  advance 
this  and  its  friends,  when  it  never  protects  your  favorite  articles, — 
your  ships,  your  lumber,  your  wood,  not  even  your  red  herring  ? 

But  it  yields  a  large  revenue,  say  its  friends,  and  therefore  must  be 
upheld.  What !  Did  they  not  avowedly  make  the  present  tariff  to 
exclude  foreign  imports  —  the  pauper  labor  of  Europe?  And  yet 
they  have  the  assurance  to  recommend  it  and  urge  the  election  of  its 
friends,  because  the  imports  of  foreign  labor  under  it  are  so  large,  and 
the  consequent  revenue  so  high.  If  these  results  are  commendable, 
we  all  know  that  they  spring  from  other  causes  —  the  opening  of  new 
markets  and  the  previous  dearth  of  goods.  In  the  same  inconsistent 
course,  they  ask  your  support  for  it,  because  the  seasons  and  the  crops 
are  so  propitious  to  the  country ;  when  we  all  know  that  these  come 
from  the  smiles  of  Providence  and  your  own  industry,  rather  than  the 
tariff;  —  and  the  good  home  market  in  higher  prices  for  what  is  sold, 
which  were  promised  by  so  many  under  the  tariff,  has  never  come, 
except  to  the  manufacturer  for  his  own  goods ;  and  the  lower  prices 


SPEECH   AT   ELIOT,  ME.  613 

for  what  is  bought,  alike  promised,  have  never  come,  except  to  the 
same  manufacturer  for  the  wheat,  corn,  and  beef,  he  eats  and  purchases 
from  the  farmer. 

The  system  is  therefore  to  be  dreaded,  on  account  of  its  partial  dis- 
criminations, appealing  to  the  sordid  principles  of  our  nature  —  the 
five  loaves  and  two  small  fishes ;  and  pursuing  politics,  like  camp  fol- 
lowers, for  plunder,  rather  than  equal  justice  to  the  whole  community. 
It  extends  the  same  proscriptive  feeling  abroad  as  at  home ;  trying, 
when  we  all  came  from  abroad, —  when  our  vessels  thrive  by  going 
abroad,  and  our  products  sell  chiefly  by  help  of  markets  abroad,  — 
and  when  they  import,  if  cheaper,  labor  from  abroad,  workmen  and 
raw  materials  both  from  abroad, —  though  trying,  on  other  occasions, 
to  excite  hostility  the  most  bitter  to  persons,  as  well  as  things,  not  pro- 
duced among  us.  This  narrow,  bigoted  feeling,  under  such  auspices, 
we  see  pushed  to  the  lamentable  extent  of  drenching  the  streets  in 
blood  of  our  chief  cities ;  and  requiring,  even  in  the  city  of  brotherly 
love,  the  protection  of  the  rifle  and  cannon  to  property,  life,  and  even 
the  holy  altars  and  churches  of  religion.  Too  much  of  this  feeling  at 
the  north  has,  I  fear,  been  carried  into  the  agitating  question  concern- 
ing the  annexation  of  Texas.  A  class  of  people  among  us  have  a 
perfect  hydrophobia  of  every  person  and  region  not  belonging  to 
their  own  clique.  With  them,  nothing  good  can  come  except  from 
their  own  leaders.  With  them,  the  shell  is  never  to  be  enlarged, 
no  reforms  tolerated,  no  boundaries  extended,  nor  securities  strength- 
ened. 

I  respect  the  opinions  of  those,  as  to  Texas,  who  dislike  the  terms,  or 
time,  or  circumstances  connected  with  the  late  treaty  ;  but  can  cherish 
no  respect  for  a  party  who  would  tie  up  the  limits  of  our  glorious 
Union  to  the  Alleghanies  or  Mississippi, —  who  still  hold  the  purchase 
of  Louisiana,  as  well  as  of  Texas,  to  be  unconstitutional,  and  would  for- 
ever renounce  those  destinies  which  invited  us  to  the  Pacific,  over  both 
Oregon  and  Texas. 

On  the  part  of  the  republican  party,  there  is  nothing  of  principle 
new  in  this  measure  as  to  Texas.  We  travelled  over  the  whole  of  it 
in  the  purchase  of  Louisiana ;  and,  under  Jefferson,  the  great  apostle 
of  liberty  among  us,  then  fought  the  battle  with  ancient  federalism, 
then,  as  now,  threatening  disunion,  if  she  was  admitted  into  the  Union. 
Texas,  and  all  its  difficulties  of  slavery,  and  other  obstacles,  were  then 
overcome,  and  her  soil  purchased.  Her  inhabitants  have  never  assented 
to  any  cession  from  us,  and  are  entitled  to  all  the  privileges  of  our 
Union  by  a  solemn  treaty  on  our  part  with  France.  Let  us,  then,  ful- 
fil our  duties  to  them,  though  late, —  to  those  who  are  not  only  ours 
by  original  purchase  and  voluntary  cession,  but  ours  in  race,  in  educa- 
tion —  ours  in  religion  and  love  of  liberty,  affection,  choice,  and  valor 
in  defence  of  their  inalienable  rights  and  independence.  But  the  ticket 
opposed  to  us  looks  on  the  whole  of  this  with  alien  eyes, —  would 
refuse,  even  by  negotiation,  to  strengthen  with  such  a  purchase  our 
52 


614 

maritime  defences,  to  guard  our  western  frontier  more  effectually  against 
the  Indian  scalping-knife  ;  to  prevent  our  enemies  from  procuring  cot- 
ton lands  to  make  them  independent  of  us.  and  girting  us  around, 
from  the  Rocky  Mountains  to  Halifax,  Bermuda  and  Cuba,  excluding 
Texas  and  Oregon  whenever  a  cloud  of  war  darkens  the  horizon ;  to 
open  to  our  views  new  sugar-fields  and  markets,  our  vessels  new  rivers 
and  harbors,  because,  perchance,  it  might  change  the  balance  of  power 
in  favor  of  the  agricultural  States  on  the  south  and  west,  or  thwart 
the  machinations  for  more  extended  empire  and  power  of  that  ancient 
oppressor,  whose  wrath  they  so  constantly  dread,  and  whose  arrogance 
they  have  so  often  truckled  to.  Let  not  the  hazard  of  war  with  Mex- 
ico be  interposed  as  an  assurance.  To  say  that  a  peaceful  annexation 
would  rightfully  expose  us  to  a  war,  or  that,  by  pursuing  our  national 
duties  and  interests,  through  amicable  negotiation  with  a  friendly  inde- 
pendent power,  like  Texas,  we  become  liable  to  the  just  censure  of  the 
world,  is  to  say  that  the  talk  of  our  fathers,  about  the  right  of  self- 
government,  was  mere  blarney.  It  is  to  hold,  under  a  government 
and  under  a  constitution  which  rest  on  the  great  principle  of  justifia- 
ble resistance  to  oppression,  that  such  resistance  is  unholy  till  the 
oppressor  himself  approves  it.  It  is  to  commit  national  suicide, —  to 
belie  our  own  example,  to  cast  a  foul  censure  on  our  fathers,  and  to 
repudiate  the  whole  American  system  of  politics,  Mexican  as  well  as 
Texian  and  of  the  United  States,  under  the  obsolete  dogmas  of  the  Old 
World  and  its  Holy  Alliances  of  despots.  The  resolve,  therefore,  of 
the  Baltimore  Convention  in  favor  of  Texas  and  Oregon,  and  the 
pledges  of  our  candidates  to  re -annex  the  first  as  soon  as  practicable, 
are  truly  American ;  nor  let  the  childish  attempt  prevail  to  frighten  us 
from  a  maintenance  of  our  just  national  rights  and  natural  independ- 
ence, by  the  cry  that  we  thus  violate  any  treaty  obligation  with  Mex- 
ico. Did  we  ever  engage,  by  treaty  with  Mexico,  never  to  buy  Texas, 
or  never  to  unite  in  government  with  her  after  becoming  independent, 
or  never,  in  that  event,  to  protect  her  against  barbarous  and  unjust 
oppressions  ?  As  well  might  the  Hartford  Convention  have  opposed 
the  war  with  England,  in  1812,  as  a  violation  of  our  solemn  treaty  of 
peace  with  her  in  1783.  No  treaties  bind  nations  to  endure  wrongs, 
or  to  submit  to  what  is  in  contravention  with  national  law. 

Nor  will  the  opinions  and  policy  of  our  candidates  as  to  Texas  tend 
to  an  increase  of  slavery.  On  the  contrary,  it  adds  not  one  to  those 
before  within  the  limits  of  the  two  countries.  It  would  more  effectu- 
ally, by  our  increased  navy,  prevent  importation  of  slaves  there  from 
abroad.  It  would  transfer  them  further  north  to  more  congenial  and  to 
healthy  climates,  and  hasten  the  wise  and  gradual  abolition  of  slavery, 
by  some  generations,  in  those  States  nearest  to  the  Potomac,  who  will 
thus  surest  and  easiest  get  rid  in  safety  of  their  present  burdens,  and, 
like  ourselves  fifty  years  ago,  become  emancipated  from  so  great  an 
evil. 

If  the  English  ministry,  and  the  World's  Convention  in  London,  in 


SPEECH   AT   ELIOT,  ME.  615 

their  ^  abolition  fanaticism ,  looked  a  little  more  at  home  to  mitigate 
debasing  and  miserable  servitude,  it  might  be  quite  as  well  for°thc 
cause  of  humanity ;  for  so  grossly  is  it  outraged  still  in  their  very 
midst,  that  a  whig  periodical  among  us  (North  American  Review  for 
July,  1844)  says  : 

"We  may  affirm  that  the  condition  of  the  galley-slaves  in  France,  or  of  the  blacks 
in  Cuba  and  the  Carolinas,  compared  with  that  of  English  children  immured  in  coal- 
mines, is  like  the  contrast  of  Elysium  with  Tartarus." 

Without  any  thirst  for  aggrandizement,  then,  or  any  attachment  to 
scenes  of  war,  or  disregard  of  the  solemn  obligations  of  treaties,  or 
desire  to  enlarge  the  number  of  our  slave  population,  but  the  reverse 
of  all  of  them,  let  us  despise  every  groundless  taunt  on  such  topics, 
and,  as  soon  as  practicable,  by  the  election  of  men  friendly  to  the 
annexation  of  Texas,  crowd  onward  the  great  destinies  which  Provi- 
dence seems  to  have  marked  out  for  our  republic.  While  we  are 
scrupulous  to  do  no  injustice  to  others,  let  us  be  equally  careful  not  to 
neglect  our  own  public  duties,  and  not  to  bring  contempt  and  dishonor 
on  our  common  country  by  a  timorous  and  vacillating  policy.  In  this 
way,  there  need  be  no  limits  to  our  Union,  but  the  growth  of  general 
education,  sound  morals,  and  intelligent  liberty. 

"  Wide  as  our  free  race  increase, 
Wide  shall  extend  the  elastic  chain, 
And  bind  in  everlasting  peace 
State  after  State,  a  mighty  train." 

My  fellow-citizens,  I  must  now  close  these  hasty  remarks,  and  make 
way  for  others  more  useful  and  entertaining. 

But,  in  doing  it,  let  me  conjure  you,  between  this  and  November,  not 
to  be  led  off  the  true  points  in  the  canvass  by  any  false  or  feigned 
issues,  like  those  I  first  alluded  to. 

The  eyes  and  hearts  of  sober-minded  men,  like  you,  will  look  higher, 
and  dwell  on  considerations  like  these  :  whether  the  cause  of  independ- 
ence and  self-government  by  a  majority  shall  prevail,  or  the  Divine 
right  of  a  few  to  rule  the  many ;  whether  those  who  hold  our  delegated 
trusts  shall  not  be  made  amenable  to  us  by  instructions,  and  a  strict 
adherence  to  granted  powers,  rather  than  enlarge  them  by  broad  con- 
structions to  cover  every  species  of  encroachment.  In  fine,  whether 
the  people  shall  rule,  or  their  servants,  and  the  policy  of  the  country 
be  shaped  by  ourselves,  or  by  the  puppets  to  Sir  Robert  Peel  or  Louis 
Philippe ;  whether  your  government  shall  continue  to  be  administered 
on  the  principles  of  Jefferson,  Madison  and  Washington,  or  dangerous 
novelties  be  introduced,  like  the  distribution  of  the  public  lands  and 
the  assumption  of  State  debts  —  those  fatal  omens  of  discord  and  dis- 
union ;  whether  trade  shall  be  left  free,  industry  unshackled,  rights 
equal,  and  your  youthful  empire  of  democracy  bounding  onward  in 
its  own  energies,  over  Oregon  and  Texas,  to  the  Pacific, —  or  all  be 


616 

cramped  up,  chained,  hedged,  emasculated,  mildewed,  and  all  be  par- 
alyzed, and  at  a  dead  halt,  or  be  limping  along  like  the  fettered 
despotisms  of  the  Old  World. 

This  may  be  considered  plain  language.  The  times  demand 
it.  You  are  a  wronged  people ;  your  interests  will  not  be  dealt  fairly 
by  and  protected  equally,  unless  you  act  in  earnest ;  you  are  too  intel- 
ligent to  be  deluded  longer.  Tell  the  aspirants  to  power  what  you 
want,  and  what,  by  God's  blessing,  you  will  have,  —  equal  rights,  equal 
protection,  equal  laws. 

The  whole  canvass  must  be  bold  and  searching,  though  just.  You 
must  be  faithful,  as  well  as  fearless ;  and  not,  like  some  cringing 
menials  of  power,  see  either  a  handsaw  or  a  whale  in  the  clouds,  as  is 
supposed  will  best  suit  the  wishes  of  a  superior  and  officer,  or  as 
cliques  may  dictate. 

Nor  do  you  want  any  neutrals  in  contests  like  this.  For,  where  such 
vast  interests  are  at  stake,  it  is  disgraceful  not  only  to  blow  hot  and 
cold,  but  to  try  to  escape  responsibility,  by  being  neither  whig  nor 
democrat,  Clay  nor  Polk,  but  an  insipid  "nothingarian."  On  the 
contrary,  the  whole  country  looks  to  you  to  be  firm  as  Agamenticus 
on  his  rocky  base  near  us,  and  to  dare  to  do  your  duty,  whatever 
obstacles  may  interpose.  In  such  a  cause,  can  any  hesitate  to  stand 
forth  and  swell  the  ranks  of  that  party  which  our  fathers  founded,  and 
under  whose  administration  of  public  affairs  Providence  so  long  blessed 
our  country  at  home  and  abroad  ?  Believe  me,  such  leaders  as  Polk 
and  Dallas  will  be  its  standard-bearers  to  victory,  if  we  are  only  united 
in  action,  vigilant  and  prompt  at  the  post  of  duty. 


TABLES 


A.     [No.  1.] 

Articles  paying  highest  duties  under  the  proposed  bill. 


A  bove  50  per  ctnt. 
(per  cent.) 

1.  Cordage,  untarred,  .    .    .    150  to  100 

2.  Cheap  cottons,      ....    140  to    25 
8.  Pepper,  black,      130 

4.  Iron,  nails,  or  spike-rods,  ...    125 

5.  Paper,  writing,     ....    125  to  100 

6.  Glass,  quart  bottles, 120 

7.  Wire,  not  over  No.  14,    ....    100 

8.  Spirits,  near, 100 


(per  cent.) 

,    .   .00  to    50 

10.  Salt, 80 


9.  Spices,  generally, 


11.  Cordage,  tarred,  .    .    . 

12.  Glass,  cut, 

13.  Sugar, 

14.  Cotton-bagging,   .    .    . 

15.  Woollens, 

10.  Iron,  rolled  and  pigs,* 


GO  to 
60  to 
60  to 
60  to 


80 
40 
40 
40 

25 

60 


At  and  under  50,  but  above  20  per  cent. 


(per  cent.) 

1.  Coal, 50 

2.  Fruits, 50 

3.  Wines, 50 

4.  Molasses, 40  to    30 


(per  cent.) 

5.  Silk, 40  to    30 

6.  Wares,  crockery  and  China,  ...  30 

7.  Linens, 25 


Three  articles  selected  at  and  under  20  per  cent. 

fl.  Tobacco, 20  f   3.  Nux  vomica, 

2.  Gold  epauletts, free. 


free. 


B.     [No.  2.] 

Highest  duties  in  England. 


1.  On  spirits,   . 

2.  Molasses. 
8.  Coffee,  . 
4.  Sugar,    . 


Foreign. 

.  500  (per  cent. ) 

.300 

.300 

.300 


Above  50 per  cent. 
Colonial. 


.160 
.  80 
.  90 
.    50 


Foreign.  Colonial. 

Tobacco,.   .250  (percent.)    200 
Teas,    .   .    .  200  or  over. 
Wines,  200  to  100 
Fruit,   ...    60 


At  and  tinder  50  to  20  per  cent. 


1.  Grain, t 

2.  Woollens, 


(per  cent.) 
.  .  50  .  . 
.   .30 


15 


3.  Wares, 

4.  Silk,  . 


(per  cent.) 
.  30  to  15 
.   .   .30 


1.  Iron,  . 

2.  Cotton, 


Three  articles  selected  at  and  under  20  per  cent. 
(per  cent.)  (per  cent.) 

.   .   .  20  13.  Salt, free. 

20  to  10 


*  Last  price-current  in  England  would  make  the  duty  near  100  per  cent. 
t  All  these  are  subject  to  10  per  cent,  higher  duty  in  certain  foreign  vessels  this 
side  of  Cape  of  Good  Hope,  and  20  per  cent,  the  other  side,  if  not  teas. 
t  When  price  low,  and  lower  if  price  high. 

52* 


618 


TABLES. 


C.      [No.   3.] 

List  of  articles  in  this  bill  yielding  most  revenue. 

Secretary  Forward's  report,  No.  209,  gives  the  quantity  of  imports  in  1840,  prices, 
and  duty  now  proposed,  and  amount  from  it. 

The  whole  revenue,  gross,  is  about  32  millions  of  dollars,  and  net  27^  millions  of 
dollars  ;  by  it  the  average  rate  of  duty  is  about  35  to  36  per  cent,  on  93  millions  of 
imports  not  free. 


1.  Silks  yield  by  it  near,      .  $4,000,000 

2.  Sugar, 3,700,000 

3.  Teas, 2,500,000 

4.  Coffee, 2,000,000 

5.  Spirits, 2,000,000 

6.  Woollens, 2,000,000 

7.  Iron, 1,500,000 

Manufactures  of,      .  600,000 

8.  Cottons, 1,500,000 

9.  Linens, 1,200,000 

10.  Molasses, 1,000,000 


22,000,000 


11.  Spices  (pepper,  one-half),    $750,000 

12.  Salt, 500,000 

13.  Wines, 500,000 

14.  Fruits  (mostly  raisins),     .  500,000 

15.  Crockery  ware, 500,000 

16.  Coal, 300,000 

17.  Hides, 250,000 

18.  Tobacco,  manufactured,      .  200,000 


8  articles, 
10  articles, 

18  articles, 


.     3,500,000 
22,000,000 

$25,500,000 


Note.  —  The  chief  changes  from  his  plan  in  these  articles  are  in  tea,  coffee,  and  salt. 
The  product  from  the  first  two,  by  the  bill,  will  be  near  a  million  less,  and  from  salt 
about  one-seventh  of  a  million  less.  The  aggregate  of  the  first  ten  articles  would 
then  be  about  $20,700,000  ;  and  of  the  whole,  about  $23,700,000. 

Silks  will  not  yield,  in  fact,  one-half  as  much,  because  most  have  been  free,  and  we 
shall  make  more  now. 

Sugars  will  not  be  as  much,  because  we  make  more,  and  from  Indian  corn,  and 
consume  less  when  higher,  as  in  England.     So  molasses.     So  make  more  iron. 

Spirits. — Import  less,  as  higher  duty,  and  make  more  at  home,  and  consume  less 
in  temperance  times. 

Linen,  tea,  and  coffee  —  All  will  be  less  used,  as  have  been  free  ;  other  articles  will 
be  substituted. 


D.     [No.  4.] 

List  of  English  articles  yielding  most  revenue, 

Among  the  witnesses  examined  before  the  committee  was  John  M'Gregor,  Esq.,  one 
of  the  joint  secretaries  of  the  board  of  trade.  He  stated  that  the  ten  leading  articles, 
which  produced  £20,502,666  revenue  in  1839,  were  : 


Sugar  and  molasses,  ....  £4,826,917 

Tea, 3,658,763 

Spirits,      .    .    . 2,615,413 

Wine, 1,819,308 

Tobacco 3,495,686 

Coffee  and  cocoa, 749,818 


Fruits  of  all  kinds,  .  .  . 
Timber  and  dyewoods,  .  . 
Corn,  grain,  meal,  and  rice, 

Total, 


£462,002 
1.668,584 
1,131,075 

.  £20,502,566 


TABLES. 


619 


E.     [Table  No.  1.] 

Several  articles  which  pay  a  higher  duty  by  the  tariff  of  1842  than  that  of  1828. 


Articles. 


silk, 


Boots, 
Coal — 

at  28  bushels  per  ton, 

at  25  net, 
Cordage,  tarred,   .... 
Cottons,* 


Cotton  laces,  .  . 
Glass,  some  kinds, 
Glass  bottles, 
Molasses,  .  .  . 
Saddlery,  .  .  . 
Shoes,  some,  .  . 
Silks,  some,  .  . 
Steel,  per  cwt.,  . 

Twine, 

Ware,  crockery, 
Ware,  Japanned,  , 
Woollens,  some,    . 
Woollens,  camlets, 


1S23. 


1342. 


30  cents  per  pair. 
G  cents  per  bushel. 


1.48 
1 


S) 


4  cents  per  lb. 
80  per  cent. 
4£  cents  per  square  yard 

12^  per  cent. 
400  per  cent. 
$2  to  3  per  gross. 

5  cents  per  gallon. 
5  per  cent. 

J5  cents  per  pair. 
20  per  cent. 
$1.50. 

4  cents  per  lb. 
30  per  cent. 
25  per  cent. 
50  per  cent. 
15  per  cent. 


40  cents  per  pair. 

$1.50. 

4.^  cents  per  lb. 

100  per  cent. 

4  cents  per  square  yard, 

and  5  if  gunny-cloth. 

20  per  cent. 

500  or  more. 

m  to  4. 

$5|  on  weight. 

30  per  cent. 

30  per  cent. 

30  to  60  per  cent. 

$2.50. 

6  per  lb. 

30  per  cent. 

30  per  cent. 

40  to  G7  per  cent. 

20  per  cent. 


[Table  No.  1. — Continued.] 

Others  which  pay  nearly  as  high  a  duty  by  the  act  of  1842  as  by  that  of  1828. 


Articles. 

1828. 

1842. 

$2  per  cwt. 
50  per  cent. 
4  cents  per  lb. 
3£  cents  per  square  foot. 
C  Soon  falling  to  10  cents 
<  per  bushel  by  the  act  of 
( 1830. 
3  cents  per  lb. 

$2  per  cwt. 

50  per  cent. 

4  cents  per  lb. 

3£  cents  per  square  foot. 

>  8  cents 

2£  cents  per  lb. 

Clothing,  made  up, 

Glass,  some  kinds, 

Salt,t 

Sugar,  f 

*  On  one  kind  of  cottons,  such  as  printed  handkerchiefs,  the  duty  is  more  than  a 
hundred  per  cent,  higher  than  in  182S  ;  and  many  of  the  specific  duties  in  this  table 
would  be  much  more  above  those  in  1828,  if  reduced  to  a  scale  ad  valorem. 

t  The  specific  duties  in  1842,  on  these  two  articles,  would  be  a  higher  per  cent,  on 
their  value  in  1842  than  those  were  in  1828,  as  the  value  of  the  articles  then  was  so 
much  higher.    Several  other  articles  might  be  added  which  are  in  a  similar  situation. 


620 


TABLES. 


F.     [Table  No.  2.] 

Several  articles  in  the  tariff  of  1842,  which  pay  a  higher  duty  than  30  per  cent, 
when  specific,  reduced  to  a  scale  ad  valorem,  at  the  Treasury  Department,  except 
when  in  brackets. 


Boots,  silk, 50  to  75  per  ct. 

Coal, 61 

Cordage, 71  to  188 

Cottons,      49  to    63 

printed  hkfs.,*   .  [132] 
many  others,!    .  [50  to  150] 
Cotton-bagging,     ....  53    to    55 

gunny-cloth,      .    .  [100] 
Clothing,  made  up,  ...  40  and  50 
embroidered,     .  50 

Flour,  wheat, 70 

Fruits, 50 

Glass,  comp.  by  merch.,  .  [186  to  243] 
Gloves,  children's,    .    .    .  75  to  50 

kid, 60 

Hats, [35] 

Hemp, [39] 

Iron,:}:  pig, 45  to  72 

scrap, .50 

bar, 85 

rolled, 77 


Leather,      53 

Lead, [100] 

whiting, 146 

Linseed  oil, [50] 

Molasses, 51 

Oil-cloth, 67 

Opium, 75 

Pepper, 130 

Paper  [97  by  merch.],      .  35 
Salt,  80  [and  Turk's  Is.],   144] 

Silks, 40  to  65 

Shoes, 50  to  75 

Soap,  soft, 50 

Sugar,  brown, 71 

refined,  101 

syrup,     ....    [161  by  merch.] 

Spirits, i    .  61 

Spices, [50  to  90] 

Tobacco,  in  cigars,     ...  40 

Wines, 60  to  67 

Woollens 40  to  87 


*  Several  articles  pay  so  high  a  duty  now  as  to  stop  all  imports  of  them  ;  and 
hence  the  rate  has  to  be  computed  otherwise  than  at  the  department,  and  on  the  values 
of  1840. 

t  See  a  schedule,  computed  on  an  English  price-current  of  Steward  &  Co. 
t  Seventeen  articles  pay  from  45  to  235  per  cent,  on  their  cost  abroad.     See  table  in 
memorial  from  New  York.    See  annexed  the  articles,  and  rate  per  cent,  on  the  foreign 
cost. 

Articles.  Ad  valorem  rate  of 

such  duty. 

Anvils,  Wilkinson's  warranted, 70  per  cent. 

Brass  battery  or  hammered  kettles, 50  per  cent. 

Butt  hinges,  cast  iron, .     .     ,     .  731  per  cent. 

Hammers,  blacksmiths', 67  per  cent. 

Iron,  in  bars, 112J  per  cent. 

"         "      under  5.8  inch  square, 240  per  cent. 

Irons,  sad  or  smoothing,  tailors'  and  hatters', 140  per  cent. 

Iron  wire,  No.  0  to  6, 235  per  cent. 

"       "      No.  14, 230  per  cent. 

Iron  wrought  nails,  rose-head,  a  bag  of  100  lbs.,  8d., 103  per  cent. 

Pins,  mixed, 75  per  cent. 

Saws,  cross-cut  and\pit,        75  per  cent. 

Screws,  iron,  called  wood-screws, 87  per  cent. 

Bright  trace-chains,  61  feet,  No.  3,  iron, 144  per  cent. 

Kitchen  furniture,  such  as  saucepans,  kettles,  &c,  tinned,    ....  45  per  cent. 

Bright  ox  and  log  chains, 160  per  cent. 

Jack-chain, 96  per  cent. 


TABLES. 


621 


G.     [Table  No.  3.] 

Articles  on  which  most  of  the  duties  arc  paid  under  the  present  tariff,  estimated  on 
imports*  near  the  same  as  in  1840,  in  value. 


Sugars  yield  near, $3,500,000 

Silks.t 3,500,000 

Spirits,      2,000,000 

Woollens, 2,000,000 

Iron,      1,500,000 

"    manufactures  of,    ...        500,000 


Cottons, $1,500,000 

Linens,      1,200,000 

Molasses, 1,000,000 


Revenue  paid  by  8  articles,    $10,700,000 


Note.  —  All  are  necessaries,   except  spirits,   and  some  kinds  of    silk;    and   al 
unfortunately  happen  to  be  rivalled  here  —  even  spirits. 


II.     [Table  No.  4.] 

Duties,  discriminating  for  manufactures  and  against  agriculture,  §c. 


Agriculture  and  other  raw  material,  low. 


Hides, %  5  per  cent. 
Linseed,  5  per  cent. 
Wool,  cheap,  5  per  cent. 
Cork,  bark,  free. 
Hags,  for  paper,  1\  cents  per  lb. 
Quills,  unprepared,  15  per  cent. 
Silk,  raw,  50  cents  per  lb. 
Bristles,  1  cent  per  lb. 

Brass,  crude,  free, 

Hemp,  30  to  32  per  cent. 

Cotton,  3  cents,  or  33  to  25  per  cent. 
Flax,  raw,  1  cent,  or  7  to  9  per  cent. 

Lead,  crude,  1^  to  3  cents  per  lb. 

Tin,  crude,  in  pigs,  1  per  cent. 
Wood,  rough,  20  per  cent. 


The  manufactured  materials,  high. 


Leather,  35  per  cent. 
Linseed  oil,  25  per  cent. 
Woollens,  28  to  60  per  cent. 
Corks,  made,  25  to  30  per  cent. 
Paper,  15  to  17  cents  per  lb. 
Quills,  prepared,  25  per  cent. 
Silks,  $2.50,  &c. 
Brushes,  30  per  cent. 

C  Brass,  manufactured,  30  per  cent. 

\      "      kettles,  12  cents  per  lb. 

5  Cordage,  100  to  130  per  cent. 

(  Cotton-bagging,  50  to  80  per  cent. 
Cotton  cloths,  80  to  120  per  cent. 
Flax,  manufactured,  25  to  50  per  cent. 

C  Lead,  pipes,  &c,  4  cents  per  lb. 

I      "     white  &  red,  4  cents  per  lb. 
Tin,  in  plates,  2£  per  cent. 
Wood,  manufactured,  30  per  cent. 


List  of  articles  free,  and  connected  tvith  manufactures. 
Models  of  machinery. 
Berries,        } 

Nuts,  and    >  used  principally  in  dying. 
Vegetables,  } 
All  dye-woods  in  sticks. 
Barilla. 

Bark  of  the  cork-tree,  unmanufactured. 
Bells,  or  bell  metal,  old  and  only  fit  to  be  remanufactured. 
Brass  in  pigs  or  bars,  and  old  brass  only  fit  to  be  remanufactured. 

*  But   imports  were  less  in   1843  than  in   1840:    so  that  they  did  not  yield  over 
47.500,000. 
t  Must  have  declined,  as  silks  are  now  taxed  so  much  higher  than  in  1840. 
t  84,118,000  were  the  imports  of  only  three  articles  out  of  the  fifteen,  in  1840  — viz.  : 

Hides, $2,750,214 

Cheap  wool  (under  8  cents),        675,009 

Hemp  (all  kinds), 686,777 

$4,118,000 


622 


TABLES. 


Brazil  wood. 

Crude  brimstone. 

Burr-stones,  unwrought. 

Clay,  unwrought. 

Cochineal. 

Old  copper,  fit  only  to  be  remanufactured. 

India  rubber,  in  bottles,  or  sheets,  or  otherwise  unmanufactured. 

Old  junk  and  oakum. 

Kelp. 

Madder  and  madder-root. 

Mother  of  pearl. 

Nickel. 

Palm-leaf,  unmanufactured. 

Pewter,  when  old  and  only  fit  to  be  remanufactured. 

Platina,  unmanufactured. 

Ivory,  unmanufactured. 

Plaster  of  Paris,  unground. 

Rattans  and  reeds,  unmanufactured. 

Saltpetre,  when  crude. 

Stones,  called  polishing  stones. 

Stones,  called  rotten  stones. 

Sumac. 

Tartar,  when  crude. 

Woods  of  all  kinds,  unmanufactured,  not  herein  enumerated. 


I.     [Table  No. 


5.] 


A  list  of  agricultural  articles,  on  which  higher  duties  are  imposed ;  but  which  are 
not  raw  materials  for  manufactures  here,  and  are  not  rivalled  abroad  so  as  to  be 
imported  much,  or  to  need  any  protection  here. 

Duty  by  act    Value  imported 
of  1842.  in  1840. 

70  cents  per  cwt.  $430 

20     "       "      "  00 

10    "       "   bushel,  16,960 
25     "       "        "  639 


Articles. 

Duty  by 

ict    Value  imported 

Articles. 

of  1842 

in  1840. 

Beef, 

2  cents  per  lb. 

$12,432 

Wheat  flour, 

Pork, 

2    « 

"       } 

Indian  meal, 

Bacon, 

3    « 

"        i 

14,087 

Potatoes, 

Hams, 

3    " 

€t           \ 

Wheat, 

Cheese, 

9    « 

CC 

23,229 

Butter, 

5    " 

CC 

3,763 

Lard, 

3    " 

(( 

7 

$71,547 


J.     [Table  No.  6.] 

Rates  of  duties  before  the  war  of  1812,  and  the  act  of  1816. 


First  act  in  1790. 


Coal,  2  cents  per  bushel. 

Coffee,  2£  cents  per  lb. 

Cordage  (tarred),  |  of  a  cent  per  lb. 

Clothing,  made,  7£  per  cent. 

Cottons,  5  per  cent. 

Glass,  10  per  cent. 

Hemp,  60  cents  per  cwt. 

Iron,  rolled,  7£  per  cent. 

steel,  ^  cent  per  lbf 

nails,  1  cent. 
Molasses,  2£  cents  per  gallon. 
Salt,  6  cents  per  lb. 


Raised  in  the  same  year,  and  in  1792,  1794, 1797, 
&c,  so  as  to  be,  from  1805  to  1812. 

5  cents  per  bushel. 

5  cents  per  lb. 

2  cents  per  lb. 

10  per  cent. 

15  &  2£. 

150  pr  foot  (window). 

100  per  cwt. 

15  &  2£. 


4-i- 

Free  after  1807. 


TABLES. 


623 


First  act  in  1790. 

Raised  in  the  same  year,  and  in  1792,  1794,  1797, 
&c,  so  as  to  be,  from  1805  to  1812. 

♦Sugar,  brown,  1  cent  per  lb. 

2J. 

Shoes,  leather,  7  cents  per  pair. 

15. 

Silks,  5  per  cent. 

15. 

Teas,  per  lb.,  6  to  20  cents. 

12  to  40. 

Ware,  crockery,  10  per  cent. 

15  &  2£. 

Woollens,  5  per  cent. 

15  &  2£. 

Articles  not  enumerated  in  the  act, 

5 

per 

cent. 

u. 

K.     [Table  No.  7.] 

Prices  of  several  manufactured  articles,  and  others  connected  with  manufactures,  in 

England. 


Salt,  per 

Saltpetre, 

Logwood,  per 

Cochineal, 

Pearlashes, 

bushel. 

cwt. 

ton. 

cwt. 

cwt. 

s.     d. 

s.     d. 

s.     d. 

s.     d. 

s.     d. 

s.     d. 

1795 

5      0 

2      8 

135      0 

11    0 

12     0 

56     0 

1806 

6      4 

3      0 

63      0 

20    0 

26    0 

51     0 

1821 

19      4 

3      0 

27      0 

6  10 

24    0 

27    0 

1824 

4      9 

3      0 

21      6 

9    0 

16    0 

31    0 

1835 

1      3 

3      0 

24     6 

5    0 

7    6 

26    0 

1836 

- 

- 

- 

5    0 

7    0 

36    0 

1838 

- 

- 

21      0 

7    0 

6    4 

25    0 

(t) 

(t) 

(§) 

(ID 

00 

(**) 

L.     [Table  No.  8.] 

Prices  of  several  agricultural  products,  with  tea,  coffee,  and  spices,  in  England. 


Years. 

Cheese,  per 

Butter,  per 

Beef,  per 

Flour,  per 

Tea,  Hyson, 

Spices,  per 

lb. 

lb. 

tierce. 

sack. 

per  lb. 

lb. 

d. 

d. 

s. 

s.     d. 

s. 

8.     d. 

s.     d. 

1795 

H 

H 

92 

3     5 

72  a    95 

4     6 

11     0 

1806 

n 

m 

135 

4     2 

115  a  143 

4     8 

4    9 

1821 

6 

8| 

120 

2     5 

105  a  125 

5     5 

8    6 

1824 

4| 

H 

90 

2     6 

60  a    73 

3     8 

6    7 

1835 

4 

U 

100 

1    11 

56  a    81 

3     2 

8    0 

1836 

_ 

10 

107 

- 

80  a    96 

2     2 

7    8 

1838 

_ 

8* 

112 

- 

63  a    81 

2     3 

6    6 

(tt) 

(tt) 

(§§) 

1 

(HID 

*  The  specific  duties  on  sugar,  molasses,  salt,  &c,  were  much  less,  when  computed 
ad  valorem,  than  like  duties  would  be  now,  as  the  prices  of  the  articles  are  much 
lower. 

+  See  2  Tooke,  397  ;  and  2  McCulloch's  Dictionary,  p.  350. 

t  Salt  is  free,  and  has  naturally  fallen. 

§  On  a  high  duty,  and  risen. 

||  Under  a  lower  duty,  and  fallen  much. 

IT  Fallen  under  a  low  duty. 

**  Fallen  under  a  low  duty. 

tt  High  duty,  and  higher  price. 

tt  High  duty,  and  higher  price. 

§§  Duty  lower,  and  fallen. 

Illl  Duty  lower,  and  some  fall. 


624 


TABLES. 


M.     [Table  No.  9.] 

Prices  of  leading  domestic  and  foreign  articles  of  produce,  at  Boston,  for  a  series 

of  years. 


W 

hd 

►n 

H 

O 

H 

o 

g 

p 

cd 

CD 

13 

CD 

i 

CD 

cr 

o 

13 

CD 

C 
2 

<-l  p 
c  i—i 

C    p 

S*a 

CD    CO 

i~  a 

o 
o 

•a 

o 
o 

35 

o 
a 

13 

CD 

c 

p 

o  o 

<•  o 

£  p 

CD 

o 

CD5 
«P 

•d 

CD 

cr 

H 

CD 
CD 

J? 

J? 

p" 

13 

CD 

Years. 

Dollars. 

Dol's 

Dollars. 

Dol's 

Dollars. 

Cents. 

Dol's 

Cents. 

Dollars. 

Cents. 

Cents. 

1795 

15  00 

18  00 

12  00 

1  00 

7  00 

33 

6  00 

21 

1  33 

14 

60 

1800 

8  00 

17  00 

1000 

75 

4  50 

40 

5  00 

25 

1  34 

14 

48 

1805 

10  00 

16  50 

13  00 

1  25 

6  50 

25 

8  00 

31 

1  20 

14J 

40 

1810 

10  00 

19  00 

8  25 

1  15 

400 

16 

8  00 

24 

100 

12£ 

48 

1815 

12  50 

25  00 

9  25 

1  00 

3  63 

20 

7  00 

23 

1  75 

16 

1820 

10  00 

14  50 

5  37 

60 

3  50 

16 

7  00 

26 

95 

10 

34 

1825 

7  50 

14  00 

5  37 

53 

3  75 

20 

10  00 

18 

100 

11 

28 

1830 

7  75 

12  00 

5  00 

55 

300 

11 

6  00 

12 

90 

9* 
10i 

25 

1834* 

8  50 

12  00 

5  50 

66 

3  36 

m 

7  00 

12 

70 

34 

1844 

4  33£ 

7  25 

4  81  to  5  62 

47 

2  25  to  3  00 

8  to  10 

3  to  6 

7  to  5 

25  to  40 

6±to  8 

25  to  31 

N.     [Table  No.  10.] 

Wholesale  prices  at  New  York  for  a  series  of  years 


Years. 

Salt,  per  bushel. 

Sugar,  per  pound. 

Coffee,  per  pound. 

Tea,  per  pound. 

Molasses,  per 
gallon. 

1805 

- 

- 

31 

_ 

1811 

- 

- 

21 

#1.70 

_ 

1815 

80  a  85 

15  a  17 

24  a  27 

1.25  a  $1.50 

60  a  75 

1825 

41  a  48 

9  a  12 

11  a  17  a  21 

30  a     1.35 

24  a  30 

1830 

39  a  42 

7  a  10 

11  a  13 

30  a     1.30 

27 

1834 

31  a  36 

7a    9 

10  a  13 

13  a     1.00 

22  a  31 

1836 

30  a  33 

10  a  13 

11  a  14 

18  a     1.10 

36  a  40 

1844 

22  a  27 

6  a    7 

5h  all 

20  a        90 

25  a  30 

No.  10  —  continued. 


Years. 

Logwood,  per 
ton. 

Hides,  per  lb. 

Rags,  per  lb. 

Copper,  per 
lb. 

Lead,  per  lb. 

Coal,  per  ton. 

1805 

_ 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

Dollars. 

1811 

_ 

_ 

- 

- 

14 

1815 

35  a  40 

13  a  14 

6  a  10 

_ 

9    a  11 

20  a  22 

1825 

22  a  26 

12  a  14 

7  a  10 

16  a  26 

7£a    8 

1830 

23  a  28 

11  a  15 

3  a    5 

16  a  22 

4£a    5 

1834 

15  a  25 

12  a  13 

2a    8 

16  a  24 

5    a    6£ 

7  a  10 

1836 

15  a  27 

9  a  14 

5a    8 

19  a  25 

6 

8  a  12 

1844 

16  a  27 

9  a  12 

6a    7 

16  a  23 

8£a    4i 

8a    8  50 

*2  McCulloch's  Dictionary—  "Prices. 


TABLES. 


G25 


No.  10  —  continued. 


Iron. 

Years. 

Pig,  per  ton. 

Bar,  per  ton. 

Rolled,  per  ton. 

Nails  and  sheet,  per  lb. 

1805 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

1811 

- 

$120 

_ 

_ 

1815 

$50  a  $55 

105  a  $  115 

$90  a  $120 

- 

1825 

35  a     50 

70  a       75 

100  a     110 

6£  cts.  a    8  cts. 

1830 

40  a     50 

80  a       85 

72  a       75 

6           a    8 

1834 

38  a     45 

72  a       75 

75 

6£ 

1836 

40  a     45 

75  a       90 

80  a       85 

64 

1844 

25  a     34 

70  a     100 

57  a       70 

11           a  12 

No.  10  —  continued. 


Years. 

Plaster    of 
Paris, p'rt'n. 

Beef,  per  bbl. 

Pork,  per  bbl. 

Butter,  per  lb. 

1805 

_ 

$10 

_ 

_ 

1811 

$20 

10  50 

$22 

- 

1815 

10  50 

12  50  a  $14 

20 

20  cts.  a  23  cts. 

1825 

5  25 

7  50 

10  50 

8         a  16 

1830 

4 

5  50 

9  25 

12         a  16 

1834 

3 

5  75  a       6 

9  50  a  $10  50 

12         a  16 

1836 

4 

9  75  a     10  25 

17  50  a     18 

20         a  26 

1844 

2  25 

4        a       4  75 

7        a       7  75 

8         a  12 

No.  10  —  continued. 


Years. 

Cheese,  per  lb. 

Northern    corn, 
per  bushel. 

Wheat,  per  hushel. 

Flour,  per  bbl. 

1805 

_ 

$1  25 

_ 

$13 

1811 

_ 

1  15 

$1  26 

7  50 

1815 

11  cts. 

1  12 

1  75 

8  50 

1825 

5          a  7  cts. 

42  a  53 

1 

5  25 

1830 

6          a  8 

52  a  53 

80 

5 

1834 

7£        a  9 

60 

4  75  a  $5 

1836 

6          a  9 

53  a  85 

1  75 

7        a     8 

1844 

4£        a  5£ 

47  a  48 

1        a  $1  10 

4  75  a     5  75 

No.  10  —  continued. 


Years. 

Common  wool,  per  lb. 

Flax,  per  lb. 

Hemp,  per  ton. 

Cotton,  per  lb. 

1805 

_ 

- 

- 

25  cts. 

1811 

_ 

- 

$300 

21 

1815 

50  cts.  a  60  cts. 

11  cts.  a  12  cts. 

300 

20 

1825 

30         a  35 

- 

155  a  $170 

20 

1830 

16         a  22 

9 

210 

11 

1834 

30         a  35 

9         a  11 

150  a     175 

10        a  13  cts. 

1836 

35         a  40 

8         a  11 

170  a     200 

9        a  20 

1844 

27         a  29 

8         a  11 

127  a     180 

8        a  10 

53 


626 


TABLES. 


0.     [Table  No.  11.] 

Wholesale  prices,  at  New  York,  of  the  following  articles. 


Years. 

Cordage,  per  lb. 

Duck,  per  bolt. 

Cotton-bagging,  per  yard. 

1805 

_ 

_ 

_ 

1811 

- 

_ 

_ 

1815 

12   cts. 

15    cts.  a  28    cts. 

_ 

1825 

7£         a  10    cts. 

U          a  18£ 

17  cts.  a  21  cts. 

1830 

%         a  10£ 

10           a  18 

13         a  21 

1834 

94         a  10 

11            a  17 

17         a  21 

1836 

8           a  10 

11            a  16 

15         a  22 

1844 

11           a  12 

7£          a  17 

13         a  18 

No.  11  —  continued. 


Years. 

Shirtings,  per  yard. 

Calicoes,  per  yard. 

Leather,  per  lb. 

Lumber,  per  1000  feet. 

1805 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

1811 

_ 

- 

_ 

_ 

1815 

- 

- 

22  cts.  a  28  cts. 

23  cts. 

1825 

11  cts.  a  15  cts. 

15  cts. 

22         a  28 

15 

1830 

8         a  11 

18         a  25 

13         a  15  cts. 

1834 

6          a    9 

9         a  20  cts. 

16         a  27 

17         a  18 

1836 

10          a  12 

14         a  24 

17         a  18 

1844 

5          a    8 

6         a    8 

14         a  19 

10         a  11 

[Table  No.  12.] 

Exports  abroad. 


Date. 

Pork  and  lard. 

Beef,  cattle,  &c 

Butter  and  cheese. 

1840 
1841 
1842 
1843 

$1,800,000 
2,000,000 
2,100,000 
2,600,000 

600,000  cwt. 

900,000 
1,200,000 
1,300,000 

200,000  lbs. 
500,000 
300  to  400,000 
600,000 

13.] 

Q.     [Table  No. 

Year. 

To  England  and  her 
dependencies. 

To  all  the  world. 

Year. 

To  England  and  her    To  all  the  world, 
dependencies. 

All  Domestic  Exports. 

Tobacco. 

1822 
1832 
1842 

$30,041,337 
37,268,556 
52,306,650 

Cotton. 

$49,874,079 
63,137,470 
92,969,996 

1822 
1832 
1841 
1842 

$2,860,173 
2,516,073 
5,849,581 1       < 
3,624,945  $       } 

$6,222,898 
5,999,799 

'  12,576,703 
9,540,755 

1822 
1832 
1842 

16,250,253 
22,496,346 
30,135,412 

Breadstuffs. 

24,035,058 
31,724,682 
47,593,464 

1822 
1832 
1842 

Beef  and  Cattle. 

271,796 
414,454 
540,710 

844,534 

774,087 
1,212,638 

1822 
1832 
1842 

1,760,703 

2,386,829 
6,750,682 

6,263,237 
5,583,990 

9,888,176 

1822 

Butter  and  Cheese 
41,017 

221,041 

TABLES. 

627 

Year. 

To  England  and  her    To 
dependencies. 

all  the  world. 

Year. 

To  England  and  her    To  all  the  world, 
dependencies. 

1832 

$109,319 

$290,820 

1832 

$22                  $4,483 

1842 

245,280 
Pork,  Lard,  fyc. 

388,183 

1842 

90,888                  523,428 

1822 

135,315 

1,357,899 

jYaval 

Stores  —  Tar,  Rosin,  and  Tur- 
pentine. 

1832 

G28,583 

1,928,196 

1842 

1,219,994 

2,629,408 

1822 

434,733                 457,562 

Sperm  Oil. 

1832 

435,425                 470,291 

1822 

_ 

8,972 

1842 

616,478                  742,329 

1832 

2,457 

38,104 

1841 

251,431  > 
140,204  5 

C  343,300 
£233,114 

Timber  and  Lumber. 

1842 

1822 

542,874               1,657,401 

Lead. 

1832 

708,576               2,149,651 

1822 

~ 

3,098 

1842 

784,754               3,230,023 

R.     [Table  No.  14.] 

Old  and  Neiv  English  Tariffs.* 


Old. 

/. 

Cables, 

Cider, 21 

Cotton  (cwt.), 2 

Coffee, 

Cordage, 

Bacon, 1 

Beef, 

Hay, 1 

Hemp, 4 

Hides, 

Lard, 

Lead, 2 

Leather  (upper), 1 

Pork,     

Potatoes, 

Rice 


&oap,     

Tar, 

Turpentine,  .  . 
Wood  and  lumber 
Wheat,t 


s. 

d. 

10 

0 

10 

0 

3 

11 

1 

3 

10 

9 

8 

0 

12 

0 

4 

0 

15 

0 

4 

8 

8 

0 

0 

0 

10 

0 

12 

0 

2 

0 

15 

0 

10 

0 

15 

0 

6 

2 

New  —  lower. 


I.       y.     d. 

6  0  cwt. 
10  10  0  ton. 
Same  as  only  7i  per  lb. 
6  lb. 
6 
14  0  cwt. 
8  0  do. 
16  0  load. 

4  0  cwt. 
6 

2  0  cwt. 
10  0  pig  and  sheet,  per  ton. 
12  0 
8  0  cwt. 
2  cwt, 
6  0  not  rough. 
1  10  0 

2  6  barrel. 

5  0  cwt. 
Reduced  about  one  half. 


4259 

916 

614 

373 

1500 

82 

S.     [Table  No.  15.] 

Number  of  entries,  from  abroad,  of  American  and  foreign  vessels,  during  1842. 

No.  of  Ameri-    No.  of  foreign 
can  vessels.  vessels. 

From  all  foreign  ports,  exclusive  of  British  North  American, 

Great  Britain  and  Ireland, t 

Spain  and  Spanish  colonies, § 

*  The  duties  by  both  the  old  and  new  tariffs  are  lower,  in  most  cases,  on  English 
colonial  products  of  the  same  descriptions. 

t  The  average  3s.,  when  cost  71s.  per  quarter,  for  wheat ;  and  about  32  per  cent., 
at  their  ordinary  prices  under  the  sliding  scale.     (British  Almanac,  1843,  p.  132.) 

i  The  British  colonies  are  peculiar  in  the  laws,  and  in  the  frequent  entries  with 
passengers,  &c,  and  are  omitted  in  the  table.  They  are  2,586  American,  and  3,689 
British. 

§  Near  two-thirds  of  these  are  from  Cuba. 


628 


TABLES. 


No.  of  Ameri- 
can vessels. 

From  France  and  French  colonies, 406 

Hayti, 194 

Kingdom  of  the  Netherlands  and  its  colonies,     ....  178 

Brazil, 176 

Denmark  and  Danish  colonies, 144 

Mexico,     • 109 

The  Pacific  Ocean, 127 

Texas, 96 

Venezuela, 86 

Naples  and  Sicily, 69 

The  Atlantic  Ocean, 56 

Buenos  Ayres, 49 

Portugal  and  Portuguese  colonies, 44 

Hanse  Towns, 43 

Africa, 41 

Belgium, 35 

Russia,      28 

China, 26 

Sweden, 23 

Turkey, 20 

Italy,      17 

Trieste  and  Austrian  ports, 15 

Central  America, 14 

New  Grenada, 14 

Asia,  generally, 10 

Prussia, 2 

Sandwich  Islands, .  2 

Sardinia, 1 

Peru,      1 


No.  of  foreign 
vessels. 

74 
3 

19 
26 
23 
13 


23 
19 


7 
112 

20 
12 

47 

3 
1 


T.     [Table  No.  16.] 

Table  of  population,  capital,  and  income,  connected  with  each  branch  of  industry 
in  the  United  States,  in  1840. 


Population  by  the  census,  as  viewed  by  some. 

Agriculture, 3,687,904 

Manufactures, 554,168 

Trades, 237,581 

Navigation,  commerce,  and  fisheries,    .     206,604 
Mines,  forests,  &c, 92,507 


Aggregate, 4,798,769 


Agriculture, 

Manufactures, 

Commerce  (fisheries  alone), 

Mining  forests,  and  professions  (mines  and  forests), 
Omissions 


Aggregate,* 


Income  by  the  cen- 
sus,  computed 
by  Tucker. 


$654,387,597 

239,836,224 

91,717,094 
59,293,821 

$1,045,134,736 

By  the  Committee 
on  Manufactures, 
in  Seriate,  1642. 

$1,252,682,223 

457,875,238 

15,204,142 

69,927,130 

204,310,257 

$2,000,000,000 


*  In  France,  the  annual  produce  from  her  land  is   computed  at  $652,221, 
England,  81,400,000,000;  and  from  manufactures  only,  about  $840,000,000. 


512  ;  in 


TABLES. 


629 


Population  by  the  census,  apportioned  and  revised  by  me. 


Capital  by  the  ecu 

sus,  as  computed 

by  me. 


Income  by  the  cen- 
sus, computed 
by  myself. 


Agriculture,* 12,750,000 

Manufactures  and  trades, 1 ,500,000 

Navigating,  fisheries,  &c, 1,250,000 

Mines,  forests,  &c,     ..." 1,500,000 


§3,000,000,000 
300,000,000 
880,000,000 
320,000,000 


Aggregate, 


.    .  17,000,000 


$4,000,000,000 


$800,000,000 
230,830,224 

100,000,000 

80,000,000 

$1,210,836,224 


U.     [Table  No.  17.] 

Proportion  of  capital  and  income,  in  1840,  to  each  person  connected  with  each 
branch  of  industry  in  the  United  States. 


Computed  on  the  tables,  as  revised  by  me. 


I     Capital  per  head.    |     Income  per  head. 


Agriculture, 

Manufactures,     .... 
Navigation  and  fisheries, 
Mines,  forests,  &c,  .    . 
Aggregate  and  average,! 


$235 

$62 

200 

150 

303 

80 

213 

53 

235 

71 

*  In  apportioning  the  numbers  of  our  whole  population  among  the  different  pursuits 
in  proportions  as  indicated  by  the  late  census,  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  the  census 
does  not,  as  in  England,  return  only  those  above  twenty  years  of  age  devoted  to  each 
branch  of  business  ;  but  it  includes,  usually,  though  not  always,  only  the  adult  males 
employed  in  agriculture  and  commerce,  while  in  manufactures  it  embraces  women 
and  children  to  the  extent  of  more  than  one-half  of  the  whole  number,  in  some  kinds. 

t  The  average  income  per  bead  in  the  United  States  has  before  been  estimated  at 
fifty  to  one  hundred  dollars.     The  medium,  seventy-five  dollars.  —  See  Pitkins. 

Professor  Tucker  makes  the  average  eighty-four  dollars  in  New  England  to  one 
hundred  dollars  elsewhere,  and  varies  as  confined  to  free  persons,  or  all  the  population. 

In  England,  the  average  income  is,  from  all  sources,  about  one  hundred  dollars  per 
head.  —  See  Spademan's  Statistical  Tables,  p.  160. 

About  the  same  to  those  connected  with  agriculture,  and  near  one  hundred  and 
thirty  dollars  per  head  to  those  connected  with  manufactures. 

53* 


630 


TABLES. 


y.   [R] 


Currency  in  coin  and  bank-notes,  at 


ACTIVE    CIRCULATION. 

Paper. 

Specie. 

13 

W 

£| 

What  country. 

Dates. 

ll 

e 

0 

as  cj 

2 

i 

"c3 

~B 
a* 

"S 

►5^ 

"o 

Jo 

0 

CU 

fc 

0 

Lc 

H 

Cb 

A.  D. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Mil's 

Millions. 

Millions. 

United  States,  .   .   . 

1774 

_ 

$3 

0  m. 

_ 

_ 

_ 

1775 

$5  m.  in 

conti- 

$4  to  94 

m. 

$11  m. 

24  m. 

nental  m 

oney  & 

~\ 

bills  of  cr 

edit. 

1780 

_ 

- 

$5 

m. 

... 

_ 

1784 

2 

m. 

10 

m. 

_ 

_ 

1790 

lm. 

2  m. 

7  to  16 

m. 

16  m. 

4 

1792 

2 

5 

12 

m. 

19 

44 

1804 

8 

5 

174 

m. 

304 

6 

1808 

18 

41 

14 

m. 

36| 

7 

1811 

224 

5* 

15 

m. 

43 

74 

1813 

52 

m. 

8 

m. 

60 

n 

1814 

46 

m. 

7 

m. 

53 

8 

1815' 

444 

m. 

_ 

- 

- 

- 

1816 

67  to  110 

_ 

u 

m. 

95 

H 

1819 

52 

104 

8 

m. 

704 

9 

1819' 

_ 

- 

44 

m. 

- 

- 

1820 

394 

4i 

- 

- 

- 

1829 

40 

12| 

14 

7 

70| 

12 

1830 

54 

m. 

10 

64 

13 

1830 

77 

m. 

_ 

8 

85 

_ 

1833 

57  to  60 

19J 

12 

m. 

m 

134 

1833 

60 

20 

4 

m. 

84 

1834 

57  to  68 

16 

4 

16 

98 

14 

Jan.  1, 1836c 

10 

8  m. 

2 

5 

141 

14| 

1837 

11 

3 

_ 

35 

148 

15J 

1838 

9 

2 

5 

24 

1444 

16i 

1840 

8 

6 

5 

0 

136 

17 

England,  alone,  .    . 

1700 

- 

- 

- 

- 

624 

54 

1750 

- 

- 

- 

- 

91| 

64 

1763 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

114 

7 

1786 

- 

_ 

110 

m. 

_ 

- 

1796 

12  5  m. 

150 

m. 

_ 

- 

1799 

1154 

m. 

96 

- 

2114 

9 

1810 

2204 

m 

- 

— 

- 

- 

1815 

144  m. 

1294 

14 

4  m- 

287| 

13 

1820 

52 

122 

- 

_ 

- 

- 

1825^ 

70 

96 

_ 

_ 

_ 

- 

1829 

38£ 

934 

2014 

94 

343 

14 

1830 

144 

m. 

1054 

384 

288 

- 

1833d 

120 

to  140 

172 

40 

342 

15 

1834 

48 

91 

174 

40 

353 

- 

1834 

36 

864 

125 

334 

281 

154 

1835-7' 

55 

91 

- 

" 

- 

TABLES. 


631 


E  —  continued. 


different  periods,  in  different  countries. 


s. 

NOT  CIRCULATING. 

XJ 

a 
a 

>. 

3   1J   C 

O 

'O     . 

d 

03    ^    O 

e 
o 

H 

03 
*    03 

J2   C 

oj 
M 

a 

at 

03    W 

o3  a 

—    g 
03    O 
03    O 
O    03 

3 
o 
o 

.5 

S   £13 
•-    £>  03 

Authorities. 

O 

|i 

JO 

CJ3 

.2 
"3 

£8.5 

O    43    C 

03 

°  «3 

35 

a 

^■Si 

•£ 

Q> 

,Q 

03 

35-5 

< 

O 

i*5 

5. 
CO 

3 

«3 

£ 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

$10 

Hamilton's  Life,  p.  248,  vol.  1. 

$5 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Anonymous. 

Hamilton's  Life,  vol.  1,  p.  359. 

_ 

_ 

_ 

- 

- 

- 

Blodget. 

4 

_ 

$3  m. 

- 

_ 

- 

Idem  and  Cox. 

H 

_ 

5 

_ 

_ 

_ 

Estimate. 

5 

_ 

12 

- 

- 

- 

Anonymous  and  Blodget. 

54 

_ 

24 

- 

- 

- 

Estimate  and  report  to  Congress. 

6 

.$8    m. 

15 

$36  m. 

$30  m. 

— 

Gallatin. 

7£ 

10    m. 

28 

_ 

_ 

- 

Crawford  and  estimates. 

61 

H 

10 

- 

- 

- 

Gallatin. 

17 

_ 

_ 

— 

Idem. 

11 

_ 

15  to  19 

_ 

_. 

- 

Crawford,  estimates,  and  Gallatin. 

71 

10 

29 

72  m. 

37 

12 

Crawford. 

_ 

15£;ofthis 

3  inU. 

S. 

- 

Reports  to  Congress. 

_ 

_ 

194 

— 

— 

- 

Gallatin. 

6 

16 

22} 

75 

31 

9 

Anonymous  and  estimates. 

5 

10 

23 

64 

33 

8 

Gallatin. 

$k 

15 

77 

23 

8 

Sandford. 

61 

20 

80} 

80 

42} 

9 

Report  to  Congress. 

6£ 

_ 

25 

- 

— 

— 

Taney. 

7 

18| 

35 

96 

55 

10 

Estimate,  December  1. 

9§ 

32 

40 

140 

65 

14 

Treasury  reports  and  estimates. 

91 

36 

38 

149 

73 

144 

Treasury  reports  and  estimates. 

9 

24 

35 

116  m. 

874* 

12 

Treasury  reports  and  estimates. 

8 

20 

33 

106  m. 

83* 

11 

Treasury  reports  and  estimates. 

11 

_ 

- 

- 

- 

Anonymous. 

14£ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

— 

— 

Anonymous. 

16 

_ 

_ 

_ 

- 

Chalmers  and  A.  Smith. 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

Chalmers. 

_ 

35  m. 

_ 

_ 

- 

Tooke  and  Lowe,  p.  102. 

23| 

_ 

36 

_ 

- 

- 

Report  to  Congress,  1832. 

_ 

_ 

_ 

— 

Gallatin. 

22| 

_ 

26 

_ 

- 

- 

Hopkins  and  Martin. 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

— 

Marshall. 

_ 

_ 

_ 

- 

Marshall. 

24£ 

_ 

32£ 

_ 

_ 

- 

Marshall.                         [estimates. 

20£ 

_ 

43£ 

_ 

_ 

- 

White's    report,    Feb.   1831,  and 

221 

_ 

_ 

_ 

- 

Anonymous  and  returns. 

23£ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

- 

- 

Anonymous  and  returns. 

181 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

— 

Marshall. 

30 

- 

- 

- 

Actual  returns  of  issues  out 

TABLES. 


E  —  continued. 


ACTIVE    CIRCUL 

A.TION. 

Paper. 

Specie. 

CD 

T3 

a 

•J    03 

(n 

O) 

0  § 

What  country. 

Dates. 

11 

c 

2"° 

CO     jg 

°S   m 

If 

2 

> 

aj 

.2 

<2c/2 

"o 

o 

o 

PL, 

& 

O 

W 

H 

C- 

A.  D. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Mil's 

Millions. 

Millions. 

England,  alone,   .... 

1886./ 

$60 

$88 

_ 

- 

_ 

- 

1837/ 

54 

90 

_ 

- 

_ 

- 

1837/ 

55 

95 

$100 

$50 

_ 

- 

1838 

60 

- 

_ 

_ 

$300 

18 

1839 

57 

90 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

1840 

54 

83 

51m. 

- 

- 

- 

Scotland, 

1832 

16» 

m. 

n 

m. 

19 

2 

Ireland, 

1832 

22  to 

30£ 

7 

- 

35 

7 

Ireland, 

1754 

_ 

- 

2 

m. 

_ 

n 

England  and  Scotland,   . 

1811 

220£ 

m. 

- 

19£ 

240 

13 

Engl'd,  Scotl'd,  &  Irel'd, 

1829 

_ 

- 

_ 

- 

288 

21 

Engl'd,  Wales,  &  Irel'd, 

1829 

144 

m. 

105£ 

38£ 

288 

- 

England  and  Ireland,  .    . 

1840 

17 

5  m. 

_ 

- 

_ 

_ 

France, 

1789™ 

_ 

- 

422  to  4' 

m. 

432 

25 

1789 

_ 

- 

355 

m. 

355 

25 

1800 

_ 

_ 

500 

m. 

_ 

_ 

1829 

_ 

50 

450 

m. 

500 

_ 

1833 

_ 

30 

175 

350 

555 

29 

1834 

_ 

30 

527 

m. 

557 

29 

1839 

8 

50  m. 

500 

m. 

_ 

_ 

Russia,      

1812 

113 

m. 

19 

_ 

132 

35 

Russia, 

. 

1815 

- 

- 

35£ 

m. 

- 

- 

Russia, 

1820 

12 

5  m. 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Austria, 

1824 

- 

- 

54 

m. 

- 

- 

Austria, 

. 

1810 

10 

lm. 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Austria, 

1830 

- 

48 

48 

m. 

96 

21 

Prussia, 

1805 

_ 

- 

43 

m. 

- 

5  to  7 

Prussia, 

1810 

None. 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Prussia, 

1830 

- 

9 

- 

- 

- 

104 

Holland, 

1830 

- 

5 

- 

- 

- 

5* 

Spain,    . 

1782 

- 

- 

86£ 

m. 

- 

11 

Europe, 

1824 

- 

- 

1 

Hl£ 

m. 

- 

- 

Europe  and  America, 

1492 

— 

— 

— 

— 

— 

— 

Europe  and  America, 

1599 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Europe  and  America, 

1699 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Europe  and  America, 

1809 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Europe  and  America, 

1829 

575  m. 

1725 

m. 

2300 

- 

Europe  and  America, 

1830 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

In  the  world,    .    .    . 

1802 

— 

— 

— 

- 

— 

— 

In  the  world,    .    .    . 

1802 

TABLES. 


633 


E  —  continued. 


a 

NOT   CIHCULATING. 

1 

tA 

£■0   ■ 

3SC 

fl 

c 
o 

O 
TO 
M    73 

2  >> 

a 

3 
o 

•5  js  'o 
2  t-  w 
S  « -a 

11 

3-3 

03"" 

d 

TO   — > 

<o  a 

'"   3 

TO    O 

o 
is 

•~  J7  TO 

•2  a« 

Authorities. 

"<3 

-C_fl 

©    03 

a 

si§ 

a 

a  <= 

.2 

<u 

g^a 

.2 

S 

o. 

-2-5.2 

<5 

o 

^2 

9 

TO 

< 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

- 

_ 

#20 

- 

_ 

_ 

Actual  returns  of  issues  out. 

- 

- 

45 

- 

- 

- 

Actual  returns  of  issues  out. 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

_ 

Actual  returns  of  issues  out. 

#16* 

- 

- 

- 

- 

_ 

McCulloch. 

- 

_ 

35  m. 

- 

_ 

_ 

Actual  returns. 

— 

- 

21m. 

- 

- 

- 

Actual  returns,  and  Mr.  Latham's 
estimates. 

H 

_ 

_ 

- 

_ 

_ 

Marshall. 

5 

- 

- 

- 

_ 

_ 

Idem. 

2 

_ 

_ 

- 

_ 

_ 

Dean  Swift. 

19 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

Gallatin. 

14 

_ 

_ 

- 

_ 

_ 

Idem. 

- 

- 

- 

- 

_ 

_ 

Idem. 

- 

_ 

- 

- 

_ 

- 

Latham's  estimates. 

17 

_ 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Necker. 

14£ 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Peuchet. 

_ 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Schlotzer  and  Playfair. 

13*  to  15 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Gallatin  and  Jacob. 

19 

_ 

15 

_ 

_ 

- 

Estimate  and  Marshall. 

19 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Estimate  and  French  papers. 

- 

_ 

58  m. 

_ 

_ 

- 

Actual  returns. 

4 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

Gallatin. 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

Storch. 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

- 

Jacob. 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Sup.  Encyclopedia  Brit. 

- 

_ 

- 

— 

— 

— 

Jacob. 

41 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

- 

McCulloch. 

6  to  8 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Sup.  Encyclopedia  Brit. 

- 

_ 

_ 

— 

- 

— 

Jacob. 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

McCulloch. 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

Idem  and  Jacob. 

8 

_ 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Sup.  Encyclopedia  Brit. 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Sup.  Encyclopedia  Brit. 

— 

_ 

— 

- 

$163 

- 

Jacob. 

— 

_ 

_ 

_ 

624 

_ 

[dem. 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

1425 

_ 

[dem. 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

1824 

r  - 

[dem. 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

Grallatin. 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

1522 

Jacob. 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

1580 

m. 

Flumboldt. 

1824 

m/ 

Bowring,  p.  490.  Note.  —  He  says 
there  is  added  in  Europe,  yearly, 
about  four  millions. 

Notes. 

«  Deposites   in  banks  (at  least  one-third  or  half  of  which,  in  sea-ports,  should 
probably  be   deemed  circulation,  and  the   fluctuations   in  which   affect   banks  very 


634  NOTES. 

deeply)  are  not  generally  computed  as  currency,  and  arc,  therefore,  to  prevent  con- 
fusion, omitted  in  this  comparative  statement,  as  well  as  any  portion  of  ordinary 
drafts  and  bills  of  exchange  which  enter  into  real  circulation.  Inland  bills,  current 
in  the  United  Kingdom,  in  1840,  estimated  by  Latham  at  $650,000,000.  It  is  appre- 
hended that  the  specie  in  Europe,  in  banks,  is,  in  some  cases  quoted  above,  com- 
puted as  in  active  circulation  ;  and  that  no  deduction  is  made  from  active  circulation, 
in  consequence  of  notes  or  bills  on  hand.  Hence,  the  11th,  12th,  and  13th  columns 
are  not  filled  up,  as  regards  Europe. 

b  Humboldt  thinks,  that  in  rich  and  commercial  countries,  if  circulation  be  specie, 
there  is  needed  over  $12  per  head,  e.  g.  in  France  ;  over  $10  in  England  and  Holland^ 
and  about  $5  in  less  commercial  and  rich  countries.  In  Asia,  the  amount  of  currency 
is  very  small  per  head.  (Jacob,  p.  347.)  But  McCulloch  thinks  England  would 
need  $960,000,000,  if  all  specie,  or  over  $60  per  head  ;  and  Blodget  (page  146)  says, 
in  1804,  at  $50»  per  head.  But  they  must  include  bills  of  exchange,  and  all  kinds  of 
legitimate  commercial  paper. 

c  All  denominations  of  money  are,  in  the  above  table,  reduced  to  dollars,  without 
attention  to  small  fractions;  the  pound  sterling  at  $4.80  (except,  see  note  g);  and 
where  the  kind  of  paper  or  specie  was  unknown,  the  sums  are  entered  across  the 
dividing  line.  Some  of  those  entered  as  estimates  are  compiled,  in  part,  from  actual 
returns  ;  and  some  of  those  considered  anonymous  are  from  writers  of  authority,  but 
the  names  have  not  been  recollected  with  certainty.  The  sums  stated,  it  will  be  seen, 
are  in  millions  and  large  fractions,  which  were  considered  near  enough  for  the  pur- 
poses of  comparison. 

d  See  amount  of  notes  of  Bank  of  England  and  country  banks,  from  1814  to  1831, 
annually  (Marshall's  Statistics,  1833,  pages  262,  263,  254,  and  255).  The  circulation 
fluctuated  much,  at  times,  in  different  parts  of  the  same  year,  being  in  Bank  of  Eng- 
land notes,  in  1825,  eight  millions  of  pounds,  or  near  forty  millions  of  dollars,  more 
at  some  times  than  at  others.  Specie  in  circulation,  in  England,  in  1833,  is  estimated 
by  McCulloch  at  only  one  hundred  and  fifty  millions.     (Dictionary,  p.  317.) 

e  See  circulation  every  year,  from  1834  to  1840,  inclusive,  in  the  Treasury  bank 
reports  for  each  year.     These  are  on  or  near  the  first  of  January  in  each  year. 

/  The  whole  circulation  in  coin  is  supposed  to  have  diminished,  from  1809  to  1829, 
quite  one-sixth,  or  16§  per  cent.  (Tucker  .  on  Money,  382;  Jacob's  Eng.,  ch.  26; 
McCulloch's  Com.  Die,  946.)  But  some  compute  the  reduction  at  only  5  per  cent., 
and  others  at  lOi  per  cent.  Silver  is  computed  to  have  fallen  in  value,  since  1492, 
quite  four  to  one,  and  gold  three  to  one.  (Tucker  on  Money,  page  112.)  Whole 
precious  metals,  in  Europe  and  America,  in  1S30,  estimated  at  $4,500,000,000. 
(Gallatin  on  Currency,  &c.)  Some  make  them  $5,320,000,000.  (Tucker  on  Money, 
p.  387.)  Others  make  them  only  $3,422,000,000.  (Jacob's  Enq.)  Silver  sent  to 
Europe,  from  America,  has  been  in  ratio  of  fifty-five  to  one  of  gold.  In  Asia,  the 
produce  is  eleven  to  one.  (See  American  Almanac,  pp.  96  and  97,  for  1840.)  The 
whole  precious  metals  in  Europe,  America,  and  Asia,  would  seem  to  be  computed  at 
not  over  $5,750,000,000.  (See  Jacob.)  About  one-third  of  them  is  estimated  to  be 
in  coin,  by  some  writers. 

e  These  are  computed  from  pounds  sterling,  at  4s.  2d.  per  dollar,  by  Tucker  (on 
Money,  p.  378).  Increase  in  weight  of  all  gold  and  silver  in  Europe  and  America, 
since  the  discovery  of  the  latter,  is  nearly  fifteen-fold.     (Gallatin's  Essay.) 

h  The  proportion  of  silver  in  the  United  States,  in  circulation  in  1838,  is  computed 
by  Professor  Tucker  at  three-fourths  of  the  whole  ;  gold  one-fifth  ;  and  the  rest  proba- 
bly copper.  (Page  59.)  In  England,  gold  at  three-fourths,  and  silver  at  one-fourth. 
(Page  57.) 

*  Mr.  Crawford  estimated  the  bank-note  circulation,  in  1815,  at  $110,000,000  ;  and 
in  one  instance,  that  of  1819,  at  only  $45,000,000. 

J  These  returns,  in  1835,  1836,  and  1837,  are  at  different  periods  in  the  year.  It 
was  not  practicable  to  get  them  all  at  one  date.  They  differ  in  different  parts  of  the 
year.  (See  note  d.)  The  specie  in  banks,  in  England,  is  only  the  bullion  in  the 
Bank  of  England.  The  returns  do  not  show  what  is  held  by  other  banks,  if  any, 
since  they  can  redeem  their  notes  by  law  with  the  notes  of  the  Bank  of  England. 

k  Some  have  estimated  the  whole  specie  in  the  country,  in  1840,  at  $91,000,000,  of 
which  $35,000,000  is  in  banks.  Others  have  estimated  it,*n  1833,  at  $29,000,000  ;  in 
1834,  at  $39,000,000  ;  and  in  1835,  $60,000,000.  (See  American  Almanac,  p.  131,  for 
1838.) 

'  In  France,  some  portions  of  1839,  the  circulation  and  specie  appear  to  be  less  in 
both  the  Bank  of  France  and  in  the  banks  in  the  departments.  About  $3,000,000  of 
the  specie  was  in  the  latter  banks. 

m  This  is  considered  a  mere  guess  by  Neckar,  according  to  Low  on  the  State  of 
England,  page  97. 


INDEX. 


A. 

Page 

Adams,   J.  Q..,  views  of  foreign  pol- 
icy of  U.  S., 77 

Agriculture,  Committee  on,      ....    13 

exports  of,  1825, 14 

important  interest  of, 14 

number  of  people  engaged  in,  .    .    19 
how  affected  by  a  high  tariff,  290,  291 

interests  of, 293 

estimate    of  crops    and   average 

prices  of, 293 

population  engaged  in, 294 

its    great   importance    (Mess,  as 

Gov.  ofN.  H.), 465 

exports  of,      466 

Alien  and  sedition  laws,     ......    90 

Virginia  vs., 100 

American  industry,  protection  of,     .    .  124 
American  system,  truly  one  of  equal, 

not  partial  taxation, 292 

constitutional  protection  of,  .  .  .  296 
Amphictyonic  council,  of  Greece,  .  .  69 
Anderson  on  agriculture,  quoted,     .    .    22 

Appendix,      549 

Appropriations  and  expenditures, prac- 
tice of  department  respecting,  .  164 
Arkansas,  admission  of  as  a  State,  .    .  355 
Athenian  democracy, 537 

B. 

Bank,  U.  S.,  like  the  dying  whale,  &c,  154 

no  source  of  relief, 157 

a  public  nuisance, 182 

Banks,  capital  of,  in  the  U.  S.,  owned 

abroad,    452 

inability  of,  the  specie-paying,     .  425 
losses   from    (Rep.  Sec.    Treas., 

1841),       - 432 

paper  of,  losses  from,  .    .    .    .432,440 
aggregate  losses  from,  since  1789,  446 
Banking  institutions,  amount  paid  for 

use  of,  annually, 444 

losses  of,  from  destruction  of  bank- 
notes since  1789,  449 

Breakwater  at  the  mouth  of  Delaware 

Bay,  report, 455 

Bolingbroke,  Lord,  prin.  of  his  party,  128 


Catholic  college,  Worcester,  in  favor 

of  chartering, 501 


Catholics,  rights  of  (speech),    .   .    .   .488 

letter  to, 495 

Channing,  his  views  of  free  trade,  .   .  533 

Chili,  treaty  with,      70,  71 

Christian  civilization,  progress  of,     .  214 
Civilization  and  free  trade,  .    .    .515,516 

progress  of, 562 

Colleges  and  academies   to  be   sus- 
tained,      465 

Commerce,  great  centres  of,      ....  180 
foreign,  protected  by  the  consti- 
tution,      340 

extent  of,  with  different  nations,  .  342 

promotion  of, 469 

like  water,  air,  &c., 514 

Common  schools,  amount  of  money 

paid  for  in  N.  H., 464 

Confederation  of  1774, 69 

Constitution,    constructive    liberties 

taken  with, 90,  91 

tendency  to  consolidation,  to  mon- 
archy,       94 

Convention  of  Hillsboro'  County,  N. 

H.,  respecting  the  war  of  1812,  549 
"  Coon-skins  and  hard  cider,"  .  .  .566 
Corn  laws  (Brit.), cumbrous  system  of,  14 
Cotton,  greatest  article  of  export  of 

U.  States, 329 

imported  in  1821  and  in  1842,  .   .  610 
Court  of  Exchequer  Chamber,     ...    60 
Supreme,  checks  and  responsibil- 
ities of, 61 

Supreme  of  the  U.  States,  busi- 
ness of, 53,57 

Criminal  laws  considered, 471 

Cuba,  position  that  the  island  cannot 
be  possessed  by  any  nation  but 

by  the  U.  S., 388 

Currency,  difficulties  of, 507 

D. 

Debt-paying  man,  debt-paying  State 

(N.  H.), 218 

Delaware  Bay,  breakwater  (report),    .  455 


636 


INDEX. 


Delaware  Bay,  dangers  of  to  naviga- 
tion,      456 

Democracy,  against  bad  systems,  had 

men,  &c, 562 

principles  of, 90 

of  1800, 91 

of  N.  H., 93 

of  the  east, 104 

complimented    hy     Benton     and 

Hayne, 105 

stigmatized, 106 

accused   for    its    justice    to    the 

south, 109 

old-fashioned, Ill 

of  the  different  States, Ill 

for  measures,  not  men, 113 

true  to  the  Union, 117 

in  the  east,  in  the  minority,  .   .   .  120 
epithets  bestowed  upon,     .    .    .   .121 

spirit  and  firmness  of, 121 

of  New  Hampshire,     .   .    87,  91,  121 

not  vs.  the  south, 122 

fathers  of, 96,  572 

progress  of,  in  different   States, 

vs.  whigs, 573,574 

Democrats,  called   "white  slaves  of 

the  south," 109 

Dorr,  Gov.,  imprisonment  of,  in  R.  I.,  597 

E. 

Education,  importance  of, 464 

Eliot,  Me.,  political  speech  at,  1844,    593 
England,    agricultural    products    of, 
1840,    1841    and   1842,   and   in 
1694,   and   manufactures   com- 
pared, 150  years,      .    .    .    .322,323 
taxation  of  all  kinds,  estimated 

amount  of, 294 

causes  of  fluctuation    of    prices 

(50  years), 321 

exports  of  1822,  1832,  1842,  .    .    .328 
takes  one-third  of  American  ex- 
ports of  grain, 331 

interference  with  respect  to  slav- 
ery,       418 

union  with  Texas, 420 

English  children,  sad  condition  of,    .615 
Europe,  presumption  of,  in  giving  ad- 
vice to  U.  S.  in  respect  to  the 
acquisition  of  territory,  .   .   .    .413 

Evans,  Mr.,  reply  to, 163 

Ewing,   Mr.,   Sec.   of  Treasury,   er- 
rors of,    126,139 

Excesses  of  1836  and  revulsions  of 

1837, 180 

Exports,  agricultural,  1825, 14 

F. 

Federalism,  principles  of, 90 

Female  instructors,  importance  of,     .  464 

Fish,  exports  of,  1825, 29 

Fisheries, 608 

report  on,  1794,  by  Jefferson,    .   .    28 

"Fiscal  bank  scheme," 137 

Floridas,  admission  of  as  a  State,  .    .  355 
Foot's  resolution  respecting  the  sale 

of  the  public  lands, 85 


Franklin,  views  respecting  tariff  pol- 
icy,      312,  320,  327 

advice  to  send   schoolmasters  to 
Canada,  rather  than  troops,  .   .585 
Free  discussion,  life-blood  of  liberty,     126 
Free  trade,  general  principles  of  (ad- 
dress),      510 

important  to  the  ship-owners  and 

farmers,      343 

favorable  to  manufacturing  inter- 
ests,      343 

favorable  to  toleration, 530 

suited  to  a  free  people  and  a  free 

government, 532 

and  "  sailors'  rights,"    .    .    .301,572 
French  influence  and  falsehood,  .   .   .120 


G. 

Gallatin,  opinion  of  respecting  duty 

on  salt, 18 

his   opinion  respecting  a  public 
debt,  excesses,  &c,    .   .    .168,180 

Government,  enemies  to, 557 

of  U.  S.,  "a  well-regulated  dem- 
ocracy "  (Marshall),     242 

"democratic,"  President  (Harri- 
son),     242 

losses  of, 566 

Grains  of  U.  S.,  estimated  crops  of,    .  331 
Great  Britain,  annual  produce  of,    .   .  336 

Greece,  sympathies  for, 475 

Guatemala,  treaty  with, 70,  71 

Gubernatorial  Message  to  Legislature 

of  N.  H., 463 


H. 

Hamilton,  his  views  respecting  tariff 

policy, 312 

Hancock,  abuse  of, 109 

Hanseatic  league, 69 

Harrison,  Gen.,  Clay's  prediction  re- 
specting,      153 

view  of  the  veto  power, 238 

Hartford  Convention,  .  102,  114,  116,  119 
democracy  of  the  east  not  respons- 
ible for, 117 

Hayne,  of  S.  C,  views  of  parties  in 

New  England, 10? 

Henry,  Patrick,  opposed  to  the  con- 
stitution,     243 

"  Home  Market,"  policy  delu- 
sive,       332, 335 

of  England,    .   . •  336 

Honesty  in  public  as  important  as  in 

private  life, 37 

I. 

Independence  of  the  U.  S.,  magnitude 

of  the  event, 577 

Industry  not  to  be  taxed  to  sustain 
a  few  at  the  expense  of  the 
many,      297 

Imports  and  consumption  per  head,    .  299 


INDEX. 


637 


Imports,   before  a  high  tariff,  since, 

and  under  a  low  tariff,    ....  299 
Internal  improvements,  singular  test 

of, 88 

views  of  Jefferson, 91 

of  Madison, 91 

resolutions  of  N.  H.  respecting,  .    93 
not  opposed  to  them  on  constitu- 
tional grounds,  ....  94,  104,  105 
recommended  to  Leg.  of  N.  H.,  .  469 
suggestions   of  1823   verified    in 

1851, 470 

Iron,  imported  in  1821  and  1841,     .    .  610 
Italy,  religious  aid  sent  to,  from  N.Y.,  531 

J. 

Jay's  treaty,  division  upon, 90 

resolution  of  N.  H.  respecting,    .  552 

Jefferson,  his  early  party  views,  .  .  90 
views  of  internal  improvement,  .  91 
impeachment  of  threatened,  .  .118 
birth-day  of,  April  13,  1830,  .    .    .536 

Jirinciples  of, 538 
ast  sentiment  of, 539 

Judges,  increase  of,  speech  against,    .    41 

Judicial  system  since  1789, 42 

independence, 61 

Judiciary  of  the  U.  S.  (speech),       .    .    41 
State,  efficiency  of  considered,  .    .  473 
Juries,  to  be  carefully  formed,      .    .    .  472 
Justice,  national,  to  be  preferred  to 

national  parade, 40 

K. 

Kentucky  resolutions,  1798, 90 

L. 

Lafayette,  address  to, 535 

Lands,  distribution  bill,  speech  on,  .  187 
great  innovation  in  concerns  of 

government, 187 

public  survey  and  sale  of  (speech),    85 
to  be  disposed  of  for  the  common 

benefit, 86 

resolution  of  N.    H.    respecting 

(1821), 87 

donation  of  a  thousand  millions 

of  acres  proposed, 187 

as  a  source  of  revenue,  considered,  188 
resolution  of  N.  H.  respecting,    .  199 
impolicy  as  well   as  unconstitu- 
tionality of, 202 

Langdon,  abuse  of, .    .  109 

Legislative    and    executive     power, 

which  most  liable  to  abuse,  .    .  253 

history  of, 253 

abuses  of, .255 

the  source  of  tyranny  in  ancient 

times,      263 

Legislative  power  more  to  be  feared 

than  the  veto, 252 

opinions  of  distinguished  men  re- 
specting, in  Rome,  in  France, 

252,  263,  264 
Liberty,  preserved  only  by  vigilance 

and  valor, t20 

54 


Loan  bill,  speech  on, 212 

Louisiana,  admission  of  as  a  State,  .  355 

purchase  of, U6 

speech  of  Mr.  Quincy  respecting,  356 
admission  as  a  State  voted  by  the 

democrats,      356 

Lumber,  a  great  interest, 607 

M. 

Madison,  his  party  influence,  ....    90 
views  of  internal  improvement,     .    91 

deserved  a  halter, 118 

impeachment  of  favored   by  one 

vote, 392 

Magna  charta, 89 

Magnanimity  to  opponents  in  power,  224 
Manufactures,  not   promoted   by   the 

tariff  policy, 343 

views  of  Franklin  and  Jefferson,  345 

interests  of, 468 

Markets,   home,  compared  with  for- 
eign,     297 

Martial  law,  speech  against  the  power 

to  declare,      485 

Message  to  the  Legislature  of  N.  H., 

1823, 463 

Mexico,  treaty  with, 70 

claims  of  to  Texas  considered,  361,  373 

authorities  cited 361 

forfeited  all  right  to  control,  .  .  370 
common-sense  tests  respecting,  .  374 
asserted  "  vigor"  of,  in  the  war,  .  395 

Santa  Anna,  the  treaty, 395 

claims  of  not  sustained  by  laws 

of  nations,      398 

Militia,  relation  of  to  General  Gov- 
ernment,      102 

to  be  sustained, 472 

Mississippi,  ignorance  of  its  import- 
ance,     331 

Missouri,  admission  of  as  a  State,      .  355 

N. 
Nantes,  edict  of  retarded  the  pros- 
perity of  France,       530 

Nashville  memorial, 66 

National  bank  and  the  democracy,  .    .  508 

finances  (speech), 212 

treasury,  state  of  (speech  in  U.  S. 

Senate), 126 

treasury,  state  of,  second  (speech),  463 
Nations,  in  what  their  independence 

consists, 351 

independence  and  recognition  of,  377 
independent  before  recognition,  .  377 
justifiable  interference  of,  ...  405 
reciprocal  relations  of, 

405,  406,  407,  412 

ruin  of,  examples, 561 

Naval  school,  speech  in  favor  of  estab- 
lishing one, 353 

New  England  blood, 104 

New  England,  politics  of, 121 

O. 

Office,  principle  of  rotation,     ....  124 


638 


INDEX. 


Oil,  exports  of,  1325, 29 

"One  man  power,"  what  it  is,  and 

what  it  is  not, 244 

Oration,  July  4,  1850,  at  Portsmouth, 

to  citizens  of  different  parties,  575 

P. 

Panama,  mission  to,  a  speech  in  op- 
position,      67 

Congress  of,  its  duties, 69 

real  object  of, 74 

Congress  of,  objects  belligerent,  70,  82 

Party,  bedlamites  of, 119 

politics,  only  speech  relating  to 

in  Senate, 85 

promises,  fallacious  ones,     .    .    .216 
prejudices,  not  based  upon  knowl- 
edge,     381 

subjects,  speech  in  Faneuil  Hall, 

1841, 560 

warfare  of, 563 

profligacy,   1840,  567 

glorification,      567 

Parties,  constructive  and  State  rights 

developed  in  1794, 89 

warrant  no  neglect  of  self-respect,  1 08 

taunts  of, 109 

sneers  of,  inconsistent, 110 

position  of,  1798,  1812  and  1828, 

110,  112 

position  of,  1844, 593 

Patriotism  of  the  east, 114,115 

Paupers,  laws  concerning  (Rep.  to  N. 

H.  Leg.), 477 

improvements  suggested,  ....  483 

Peace  party  in  war, 105 

of  New  England,  .    .    .    107,  114,  115 
Peace,    power   of  nations  to  compel 

others  to  make, 393,  401 

Pennsylvania,  debt  of, 207 

People,  greater  than  the  throne,  ...    95 
deluded   by  the   "Marats,"   the 

"Dantons,"  &c,  of  Mass.,  .  .117 
rights  of  against  tyranny,  .  .370,371 
instincts  of  seldom  wrong,     .    .    .421 

Perpetual  leagues, 69,  70,  71 

Peru,  treaty  with, 71 

Political  quackery,  ....  154,  155,  156 
Portsmouth,  return  to,  1841  (speech),  540 
Precious  metals  (specie),  arrangement 

of,  to  save  labor, 157 

President  Polk,  address  to  on  his  visit 

to  Portsmouth,      544 

Prices    of    articles    of    agricultural 

growth,  1836,  1839,  1844,  .    .    .  605 
Progress  of  man,  as  connected  with 

free  trade, 531 

Property,  estimated  amount  of  in  U. 

S.,  1842, 293 

Property  test  for  holding  office,  .  .  .  490 
Protection   to   farmers   less    than   to 

manufacturers,      604 

Protestant    test    for    holding    offices 

(speech  in  N.  H.  Conv.,)     .    .  486 

origin  of, 487 

Public  credit,  depreciation  of,  1800, 

1842 214 


Public  money,  on  the  safe-keeping  of 

(report),      425 

government  depositories   for,    .    .  425 

suggestions  respecting, 426 

the  keeping  of  left  to  Sec.  Treas. 
till  1816, 431 

R. 

"  Reign  of  terror,"  in  1798,  1812,    .    .  557 

Relief,  singular  measures  of,  to  gov- 
ernment, States,  and  individ- 
uals,      159 

Resolutions  of  Virginia  and  Ken- 
tucky, 1788,  principles  of,      .    .    90 

Revolution,     surviving     officers     of, 

claims  of, 29 

provision  for,  1780, 32 

Revolutionary  officers,  survivingones, 

1828, 38 

Revolution  of  1776,  results  of,     ...  576 
commenced     by    argument,     not 
force, 579 

S. 

Salt,  importance  of  a  low  duty  on,  .   .    15 

duty  on,  a  war  tax, 15 

tax  on,  in  France, 17 

tax  on,  in  England. 17 

duty  on,  a  tax  on  the  poor,    ...    18 
as  necessary  to  the  farmer  as  the 

elements, 18 

duty  on,  repealed  in  1807,  ....    19 
duty  on,  formerly  intended   only 

as  temporary,  " 20 

duties  on,  paid   chiefly    by   the 
people  east  of  Alleghanies,    .    .    20 

importation  of,  1825, 20 

low  duty  does  not  lessen  revenue,     22 
duty  on  not  intended  as  a  perma- 
nent revenue,     20,  21,  22 

its  importance  to  cattle,     ....    23 
increased  consumption  favorable 

to  navigation, 23 

facts  concerning, 23,24 

and  luxuries  compared,  as  articles 

of  duty, 24 

requires  no  duty  for  protection,    .    25 
duty  on,  not  required  by  interest 

of  manufacturers, 24,26 

its  importance  to   the  freighting 

interest,      26 

Santa  Anna,   his  power   to  make  a 

treaty,      396 

Scientific  surveys  recommended,  1823,  466 
first  to  suggest  them,  note,    .    .    .  466 

Ship-building,  interest  of, 300 

Slavery,  not  favored  by  N.  England,   122 
white  and  black,  lamented,  .  387,  388 

abolished  in  Mexico, 387 

"Solitary  grandeur,"  sectional  par- 
ties,       56 

Sub-treasury, 426,  506 

Sugars  imported  in  1821  and  1841,  .    .  610 
Southern    States,    sustained    by    the 

democracy  of  the  east,     .   .   .   .109 


INDEX. 


639 


Southern  States  sustained  by  the  de- 
mocracy of  New  Hampshire,    .110 
Spain,  resolved  to  subdue  her  prov- 
inces,   73 

Specie  circular, 130 

States,  power  of  admitting  new  ones, 

considered, 357 

opinions  of  Story  and  others,  re- 
specting,       357, 358 

State,  what  constitutes  one,  375,  376,  377 

State  rights, 89,  93 

opinions  of  Adams,  Ames,  Ham- 
ilton, respecting, 94 

decisions  in  different  States  re- 
specting,      100 

Supreme  Court,  power  of, 96 

Swift,  remark  of  on  taxation,  ....    22 
Swiss  cantons,      69 

T. 

Tariff,  resolutions  of  S.  C.  respect- 
ing,       101 

of  1823  not  acceptable, 123 

of  1842, 225 

speech  on,  1842, 266 

a  system  of  taxation, 267 

taxation  doubled  by  the  whigs,    .  269 
low  in  France,  Switzerland,  Hol- 
land,   Cuba,    and    during    the 

Revolution, 274 

of  1739,  1812  and  1807, 274 

of  1816,  1824  and  1828,  .  .  .  .  .275 
low  one  tends  to  economy,  a  high 

one  to  extravagance, 276 

low  one  democratic, 276 

effects  of  a  high,       277,278 

low  one  increases  revenue,  .  .  .281 
high  one  leads  to  smuggling,  280,  231 
should  be  graduated  on  horizontal 

scale, 232 

different  ones,  review  of,  ...  .  234 
resolutions  passed  by  Mass.  vs. 

as  a  source  of  protection,  .  .  .  287 
policy,  its  effects  on  agriculture,  290 
different  ones  as  connected  with 

exports,  war,  revenue,  &c,  .  .  299 
second  speech,  respecting,  .  .  .  302 
of  1323  a  bill  of  abominations,  .  305 
views    of     expressed     by    Silas 

Wright, 306 

Hamilton's  views  respecting,         312 

Franklin's  do., 312 

of  1842  a  bad  revenue  measure,  316 
a  high  one  increases  prices,      .      320 

prevents  consumption, 326 

deprives  U.  S.  of  foreign  markets,  332 
results  of  a  high  one,      .    .    .334,337 

freights,  affected  by, 339 

coasting  trade,  affected  by,  .  .  •  339 
navigation  interest,  affected  by,  .  340 

fisheries,  affected  by,      340 

system,  a  selfish  one,      352 

adverse  to  progress,     ......  352 

Swiss  succeed  without  high  duties, 523 
Taxation,  two  and  two  do  not  always 

make  four,      22 


Tea  and  coffee,   necessaries   of  life, 
ought     to     be     free    of    duty 

(speech),     182 

Tea  and  coffee,  amount  imported  1822,  467 

Tea,  quantity  imported  in  1840,  .    .    .185 

Territory,  wisdom  of  increasing,     .    .  359 

illustrated  by  examples,     ....  359 

conceded  to  kings,  denied  to  the 

people, 372 

national  law  in   regard  to  alien- 
ating, . 372 

Texas,    re-annexation    of,  speech   in 

favor  of,      355 

constitutionality  of  considered,    .  355 

precedents  quoted,  355 

nationality  considered, 361 

within  the  limits  of  Louisiana,    .  364 

history  of,      364 

its  importance  to  the  U.  S.,  .  385,  336 

boundaries  of, 389,  390 

prudential  measures  of  U.  S.  re- 
specting,      391,392 

the  occasion  of  war  considered,  393,397 
independence  of  (Webster),     394,  399 

question  of  annexation, 613 

Tonnage,  for  foreign  trade, 299 

increase  of, 511 

Tories  of  the  Revolution, 562 

Treasury  department,  report  of,  .    .    .  425 

U. 

Union,  and  schemes  of  disunion,  .  .114 
threatened, 117 

Union  and  fugitive  slave  law,  1850,    .  534 

Union,  hroad  principles  of, 561 

enemies  to,  in  1312, 557 

United  States,  extent  of  territory,  .    .    14 

foreign  policy  of, 77 

articles  of  export  of, 329 

and  England,  mutual  interests  of,  331 

V. 

Van  Burenism,  "legacy  of,"    .    .134,140 

Veto  power,  importance  of  (speech),    .  236 

claimed  by  kings  as  from  Divine 

right, 237,250 

exercised  by  Queen  Elizabeth   34 

times  in  one  session,       .    .        .  237 
approved  by  all  the  States  in  con- 
vention  on  the  ratification  of 

the  constitution, 237 

highly  expedient,  if  used   in  the 
spirit  which  was   intended   by 

its  authors, 238 

defended  by  the  illustrious  of  all 

parties, 239 

indispensable  to  avert  hasty  leg- 
islation,        239 

objections  to  examined,  ....  240 
exists  in  17  State  constitutions,  .243 
not  exercised  sufficiently,  ....  243 
commended  by  best  writers, adopt- 
ed by  England,  by  France,  .  .  244 
to  prevent,  not  to  do  wrong,     .    .  244 

a  wise  precaution, 246 

why  opposed, 248 


640 


INDEX. 


Veto  of  G.  B.  equal  to  the  defeat  of 

law,      250 

less  dangerous  than  legislative,   .  252 
Veto  power,  when  exercised,  has  al- 
ways been  approved  by  the  peo- 
ple,   261 

"  Vigorous  reduction," 174 

Virginia  resolutions,  1798,  90,  96,  97,  102 
in  favor  of  strict  constructions,    .  194 

W. 

War   with  Great  Britain,    1812,   ad- 
dress to  president  U.  S.,    .    .    .  549 

resolutions  respecting, 551 

address  to  the  people  respecting,  557 


Washington,  his  views  respecting  the 
claims  of  the  officers  of  the  Rev- 
olution,    33 

Washington,  views  of  veto  power,  ,    .  240 
Webster,  views  of  the  tariff  policy,     .  124 
on  the  independence  of  Texas, 

394,  401,  402,  404 

Whigs,  rhetoric  of, 167 

exaggerations  of,      565 

hypocrisy  of, 565 

complaints  of, 565 

measures  of, 564,570 

Woodbury,  Levi,  biography  of,    .   .    .  vn 
Woollen   manufactures,    their    inter- 
ests,      603 


W 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 

Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


ppr' 


7^—r 


MAR 


1V67-& 


LOAM  DEP  ^  month  after  RK£jh 


;~    JUN  28  1967 


LIBRARY  use 


\- 


—         RECEIVED 


ft&0on'R7-4P^ 




— 

WllNltR  LIBRARY 





BEC.  CIR.   FEB      3    K79 


,; 


JAN     J!  2004 


tf 


^ZIZZ53^^ 


LD  21-95m-7/37   1" 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


YD   14471 


£3*0 


sf 


